A Break Down on Primary Polls and the Money Race

[00:00:11] Welcome to The Break Down with Brodkorb and Becky, a weekly podcast that breaks down politics, policy, and current affairs. I'm Becky Scherer. And I'm Michael Brodkorb. We were off last week, but back at it. As mentioned two weeks ago, mid-July marked the anniversary of the tragic assassination of Melissa Hortman and her husband. Friends and loved ones shared great stories and memories of Melissa Hortman, who Melissa Hortman was, and why she worked so hard for Minnesotans.

[00:00:35] And today we wanted to discuss this briefly along with how this tragedy has spurred change in attempts to keep candidates and elected officials safe. Then we're going to get into one of my favorite topics, recent polls. Who is in the lead? Who is disliked? And what issues matter most to Minnesotans? Of course, we will break it down with our take on the results. And then following the poll chat, we turn to another conversation we love to have, campaign finance reports. It's post-endorsements, mid-2026, and early voting in the primary is just around the corner.

[00:01:02] So we are excited to break down all things election and really take aim at the 2026 election season. We will wrap up with a quick discussion on the recent Craig Flanagan debate. So thank you for joining us and enjoy the show. So Michael, we are back after a week off. I don't know about your household, but mine has been chaos. Wyatt is in soccer and t-ball, and he's turning four this weekend, and we're hosting a party at our house,

[00:01:31] which means finishing yard work and cleaning and hosting the in-laws. And whoo! It's a busy time. Four. Four. Four. He was just born when we started the podcast. And now he's four. Right? I came back from maternity leave, and we started this. This is just a little bit younger than my wee little child. He's going to be driving soon. I don't want to talk about it. I could probably cry right here now. Oh, yes. Well, that's great. Big plans. What type of party?

[00:02:01] Yeah, so we've done a couple different things over the years. We've just rented out, like, a gazebo at a park that has a splash pad and all of that. This year, we decided I have some—I have three sisters. All of them are unavailable this weekend, so their kids also aren't coming. So it's a way smaller crew. So instead of renting something out, we put that money towards his gift and got him one of those huge inflatable water slide kind of things. So we're just popping that up in our backyard,

[00:02:26] and the grandparents, my brother, brother-in-law, and folks are coming over. And, yeah, we're just going to grill and watch the kids play and be in the water, and it's going to be awesome weather. So it's the first time we're hosting the party at our house, though. So it is a whole different ballgame. That's amazing. A water park. You bought your kid a water park. Can adults go on that? I'm sure you could. Great. He's a water kid. Sounds like an open invite. Yeah.

[00:02:52] He goes and fills up a bucket at a backyard and plays with water anytime we let him. If I was just puddling in there one day after you came home from work, that'd be okay. Like, there's pool. I have pool privileges for the podcast. Yeah, pool privileges. That's great. That's fantastic. So, and Saturday's supposed to be a nice day. It's going to be beautiful. Yes. I have a couple of family things coming up, which has led to, in the next week or so,

[00:03:18] and that's led to some home renovations, homework around the house. I have to ask, are you handy? Is your husband handy? The reason I self-disclose that is because it should surprise no one that I am not handy. I'm okay. I can, you know, hang a photo or something, but I let my husband do all of that. He's pretty handy, although not always using the measuring tape as I would like things to be even

[00:03:48] and all of that. But other than that, he's pretty handy. First of all, my wife is amazingly handy. She's great doing stuff. Surprisingly, not surprisingly, my daughters and my son is great at doing stuff. My daughters are really, I think, peak in terms of, like, getting, I mean, they've done drywall. They've done mudding and taping. They've done a whole bunch of great stuff. I have long said this.

[00:04:14] As we've disclosed before in the podcast, I have a carry permit, Second Amendment guy, within reason. But, and that requires some training. That requires you to get certified and trained. And, you know, I practice on a very regular basis to maintain good skills. I, and there's a supervision process when you're going through that. I am amazed with what I can walk into Home Depot and get and rent.

[00:04:41] And they give me without basically no background check at all. It blows my mind. The things, cement sanders and power washers and other types. I walk into Home Depot all the time and say, is this the day I die? I mean, is this the day I do something? And I have no business doing this stuff. It's like that scene in Step Brothers when they built the bunk beds and then they collapse. And the kid, the guy runs into his mom and his dad.

[00:05:10] And what a bad idea. This is a terrible idea. Why did you let me do this? Why did you let me do this? And so there's also a great Simpsons episode where Homer Simpson tries to build a grill in the backyard. And that goes terribly. And so home improvement projects generally end with me saying this was a bad idea. The other thing I will just very, yes, I will briefly say, and I have hired some great people to help with some stuff. The other thing I will say is, you know, what's very dangerous?

[00:05:38] YouTube gives you a tremendous self-confidence. Like, oh, I can do that. Oh, yeah. I can do that. I can sand the, I can sand cement. I can build things. So, no. I'm with you. I have, I have, I have. Hefty aspirations in life. One of my favorite kind of account to follow on Instagram is like these women who are DIYers and moms. And so it's parenting and all of this.

[00:06:03] But they like build built-in closets, you know, in a master bedroom from scratch. Just like building the boxes and the drawers and everything. And I'm like, I want to like nail two things together. And I feel so accomplished. So, um, love that your daughter's already into that. I think it's great skills to have. Two points and then we can move on. My hope is that we record next week. Yeah. And that I did nothing in the next week or so in preparation. Electrocutes me. Leaves to your demise.

[00:06:31] And I'll give you my basic, my best tip about electricity. It's white wire to white wire, black wire to black wire. That's it. That's all you need to know. Everything else, leave to the experts. If it's more complicated than white wire to white wire, black wire to black wire, just call someone special. Always call a professional. We're not, this isn't necessarily, I would say, a trades-based podcast, but we should support our men and women in the trades industry. Absolutely.

[00:06:59] And the journeymen that are out there, men and women who are out there building a stronger America. So kind. My stepdad's dad was an electrician, and so he's gotten a lot. I mean, the amount of stuff my stepdad has done in our house of setting dimmers and splitting things off. Maybe we need to have a full home improvement podcast someday. Absolutely. But not today. Because we've got a lot to get into.

[00:07:22] So we're going to move into a couple weeks ago, before our break, we briefly mentioned that the anniversary of the murder assassination of Melissa Hortman and her husband was coming up. It was on June 14th. And so we wanted to continue to mention that. It was beautiful to see some of the stories and memories and conversations about her and her work and what she does for Minnesota from friends, family, loved ones.

[00:07:50] But there has also been, you know, some productivity production that has come out of this to ensure the safety of our elected officials and candidates. And we're in that little realm of them still figuring out what that actually looks like. But one thing that has been big is the process of the literal addresses of candidates and elected officials that were completely public up until a year ago. Something I knew.

[00:08:16] I had been online, you know, seen that was on, you know, the House pages and the Senate pages and all the filings and everything. It didn't personally strike me as odd. It just it was there. It made sense. I didn't really think much of it. And then since the assassination, it was found that the murderer used the Internet to locate addresses of the public officials that he targeted, including the Hortmans.

[00:08:39] And so the state government has been working overtime, I mean, immediately in the hours following that murder to remove home addresses from campaign finance reports. There's new state law that was signed in of what is publicly displayed. Historical records are going scrubbed. I mean, they are spending hours and hours painstakingly going through every filing, current, new and old, to scrub off of all of these.

[00:09:07] And I think, I mean, did you prior to this ever think twice about all of that information being public up until 2025? No, I mean, it was surprising. I was, you know, looking at some for previous podcast episodes. I was looking at some historical data and noticed that they were down. I think it makes absolute sense. You know, one of the things that we've had is aside from these terrible assassinations and this kind of climate of fear.

[00:09:36] And this absolute hatred that's gone. We've had some legitimate residency questions that have been asked. And so about legislation, we had a legislative candidate that was kicked off the ballot recently. And so it's a balancing act because, you know, there are requirements. There are constitutional requirements for how people, where they have to live in order to run for office. And in Minnesota, you know, you have to live in your legislative district for a certain amount of time.

[00:10:03] And so there's going to need to be some fact checking and some work that needs to be done. But I will tell you that my perspective has totally changed on this. I mean, I remember, you know, one of my first campaigns I worked on was Rudy Boschwitz's campaign. He had his phone and address in the phone book. And, you know, people would just call him all the time. And that was an important thing for his, like, constituency service was people having access to him.

[00:10:33] We're just in a different time right now. And so I think it's important that legislators, staff, and others feel safe and they're not as exposed while simultaneously there's a good check and balance on making sure that these legislators are living in the districts that they were. But I'm way more concerned, way more concerned about the safety of legislators and staff than I am about a residency requirement.

[00:11:01] But I just bring that up as we break things down and we're kind of, you know, nerdy about this stuff sometimes. But the human aspect of this is what's most important, just making sure that folks are safe, legislators feel safe, the staff feel safe, and their families feel safe. Because these aren't just attacks on the legislators. It's been their family members. And we want good people to run for office. Both sides of that, we want good people to run.

[00:11:28] And having this additional set of safety there for legislators, their staff, I think is significant and important. Absolutely. And it's still new. It's still a balancing act. There are different stipulations in place for, you know, the party caucus leaders still get access, can have access to all of the addresses. There is a separate process that they're working through to verify any residency challenges. So there will be, you know, a trust but verify kind of situation.

[00:11:57] But yes, obviously the safety of these men and women who dedicate their lives to run for office, to serve in public office, and their families should absolutely be paramount in all of this. And there's been some changes in the law, really. There's been some, I don't want to say changes in law, but there's been some rule accommodations made for expenses for home security systems and other types of things. I think that is needed.

[00:12:24] I think there needs to be legislators, anyone who's in politics, running for elected office, party staff, others, and even high-level staff find themselves on the receiving end of this. And so we need to platform and mainstream legislator, legislator staff, political leader safety. And it's sad why we're doing this.

[00:12:49] And, you know, one of the things I would say is that, as you were kind of introducing, getting into this subject, the tributes, the outpouring of support for the Hortmans, their family, and for the Hoffmans who were targeted along with other legislators. It was an outpouring of support. I'm constantly wondering if Minnesota has learned from it. I hope we have. I don't know yet, but I hope we have.

[00:13:17] But I hope that something that we can make the environment for legislators to run, staff politicians, safer because of this horrific, horrific situation. Absolutely agree. I agree. We'll continue to watch as things evolve there, anything else new that comes up. But I want to shift into election season. First off, early voting starts this Friday. That is wild.

[00:13:46] I, like, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around. But primary election is Tuesday, August 11th. You can vote early in person or via mail. I encourage everybody to go to mnvotes.gov to register, check your status, order absentee ballots, all of the things. We love voting. Please go vote. Absolutely. Go vote. And, yeah. So with that, though, we're going to now chat polls, which, you know, this is like a nerd episode for me.

[00:14:15] So I apologize of all the numbers I'm going to regurgitate here as we move forward. So two recent polls that came out, KSTP Survey USA poll and Start to Beum, Care 11 U of M poll. We're going to walk through them a little bit separately, but, you know, they're a little bit different of how they were formed and formulated. KSTP Survey USA poll is namely a primary election poll. So we're going to chat here first.

[00:14:39] Starting with Governor on the GOP side, we have Lindell leading at 27%, Daymeth at 22%, Qualls at 17%, and Undecided at 24%. Just straight off the bat, any numbers, anything that surprises you there other than it's a popularity contest? It's basically these are name ID polls. That's it. And that's going to be a theme I'm going to talk about, which these are name ID polls.

[00:15:04] So what's triggering, and there's what's triggering the support or the recognition is, oh, I recognize that name. Right. That's kind of it. Does it surprise you at all that with that name ID, with Speaker Daymeth being on the ballot, with Mike Lindell, who's been on our TV for years, and then, you know, besties with Trump and so everywhere for the recent years,

[00:15:27] and then Qualls, who's been running for four or six years here, is it surprising to you that a fourth, a 24% are still undecided on this side? Maybe a little bit. It is undecided. I think it's, you know, there's a lot of room here for this to play out. And what I mean by that is no one is in a dominant position. Lindell is winning.

[00:15:51] And what this comes down to is the apparatus behind the scene, which we'll get to. But yeah, I mean, there's a, I mean, as you know, as you noted, nearly one in four Republicans are undecided in this race. And how do you get a message to them? I think is going to be fascinating to see because the endorsement process matters. It still does in some ways.

[00:16:16] And I just, I keep going back to the endorsement process will matter and it will matter in some way. And so that will get into some of the handicapping, but we'll see. How about you? Yeah. I mean, I thought it's a little surprising. I also think it's so hard to judge at this time because it's early June. I feel like voters just have a lot of other things on their mind, in their brains at this moment.

[00:16:43] So I just also feel like there's a little lack of interest in even looking at anything here. But I think it's just, it does seem very large. And it's similar in the GOP Senate race. We have Tafoya at 36%, White at 15%, Schwarzey at 7%, and Undecided at 27%. So again, you know, I think with, again, some of those names, because we have Tafoya, who folks have been watching for years in football. Royce White, who was the endorsed candidate on folks' ballots previously.

[00:17:12] It's just surprising to me with folks that actually do have some name ID that there is such an undecided. And possibly it's because while they know the names, they just don't know enough. I want to be optimistic that we have voters who are like, I need to be better informed. I don't know if that's true. Yes. But I would like to think so. So my take on these primary numbers is its popularity. So number one, so people are recognizing the name.

[00:17:38] To what degree that impacts how they vote in the primary is going to be interesting. Because obviously I think it's the race to get, to mobilize your base and to mobilize your voters to come out in the election. The difference would be if your last name was like Larson or Anderson. I think those names, if you look over the years, there's been a kind of a perennial candidate that's run in Republican primaries. My name is Sharon Anderson.

[00:18:07] Not the Sharon Anderson from Good Company, which was a popular TV show in the 80s in Minnesota. But Sharon Anderson, who I would politely label as a bit of a gadfly candidate. She has been running in primaries for years. And her last name is Anderson. And people go to the polls and they say to themselves, oh, there's Sharon Anderson. She's running. Oh, I recognize that name. And so they'll just vote for the Anderson.

[00:18:33] And so it's really, it's not as simple, I think, as someone with high name ID is just going to win. I go back to Pawlenty in 2020, in 2018. When Pawlenty ran against the endorsed candidate in 2018, he ran against Jeff Johnson. Now, Jeff Johnson has a good name, but Pawlenty also had very high name ID. And that came down to the endorsement process.

[00:18:59] And so I think it's what I'm trying to be consistent about is name ID in these polls matters. But what kind of name ID? And so, and push back if you think I'm wrong. So Lindell is known as a kind of conservative MAGA cheerleader. Rah, rah, sis, boom, bah. That's it. I mean, he's Trump's guy.

[00:19:27] So I think his name ID is of benefit to him. You look at the Senate race and it's Tafoya and White. Tafoya is known for a tremendous career in broadcasting, strong career in broadcasting. And so White is kind of a basic last name, but he's known as also been from running.

[00:19:52] I don't know to what degree the association of their name helps them in the primary. I don't know. And that's, and I want to be consistent and fair because I also just talked about the Sharon Anderson. So I don't know. I think I'm going to, I'm going to, when we get to predictions at some point, maybe later this summer, I'm probably going to pitch it as what I'd be most surprised by rather than what I think is going to happen.

[00:20:21] Because ever since Trump ran for office and won in 16, I've really tried to stay away from the prediction game. But I just think this, what this comes down to in these primaries is, yes, it's good. First of all, it's always good to have name ID. You will never, ever hear me say that. I mean, unless you're Hitler. I mean, your last name, I mean, if you have really bad name ID, okay. Or me running in like 2012. Name ID like that.

[00:20:50] So it's like, it's got to have good idea. Name ID. I once said that I was as popular as Hitler pitching new Coke in 2012. So my point I'm just saying is that's just kind of what it's like. And so you got to have good name ID. So I think Lindell has good name ID, but I think, and Tafoya's got strong name ID in a different way. And so I think it comes down to mobilization. And I think that's exactly it.

[00:21:15] What I was going to say, pushing back though, on the Pawlenty side of things is, I mean, I loved Governor Pawlenty. I have had the luxury of meeting him at events over the years. I think he did great stuff with the Financial Roundtable. Big fan. But I thought in 2018, they kind of thought maybe the name ID would be enough for him. And so I think that to me is where you have to do more.

[00:21:42] And so like Lindell has great name ID, but I also think he has a ceiling because so many people look at him as who he is and what kind of role he is in. So I don't know how high his ceiling is. I could be surprised because, again, Trump has been elected twice. But I think that with a Dameth, like in this situation, I do think that Lindell, Dameth, and Qualls are all working the base out there meeting with voters and kind of trying to,

[00:22:09] not just leaning on name ID to get them over the finish line. And similarly with the Senate race, I do think that Tafoya and Schwarzman in particular, I've seen working, you know, going out, going to events, working hard. Tafoya, I think, you know, will likely see a little bit more of her. But some of the things I was surprised about here, which makes me feel like name ID, as voters find out more, as we get debates, as we get more information over and, you know, people get pelted with mailers and digital ads and everything,

[00:22:39] was just some of these this breakdown of the GOP Senate race. So we have Tafoya is obviously winning by 21 points, easily leading above both men and women. But women are more undecided in this race and supportive of Royce White, which is very shocking to me and makes me feel, again, it's a name thing that they recognize the name and don't know the details. Similar to, oh, go ahead.

[00:23:05] I was just going to say, if exit poll shows that Royce White won with women, I don't know. I don't know. That may be my breaking point. Republican women, I don't know what I could do to. That democracy just, I don't know that I can, I don't know that my head can handle that data point. I mean, we'll. I can barely handle it now in June. We'll break it down. We'll be honest. But I don't know that I can handle that data point.

[00:23:33] Interestingly, also, Tafoya is leading among all right-wing ideologies, especially conservative voters. Moderates are more split. Now, this is like completely counter to what we discussed about Tafoya going into the M&GOP convention, which is your big right-wing ideologists. So it's just, again, is this the name ID versus what we know about the candidates? We need to know more. Voters need to know more.

[00:24:02] And I hope to think that will sway these numbers, which way? Completely unclear. So as I've said repeatedly on this podcast, I'm not a math guy. I know basic math. But what I also, when I ran for deputy chair, I was running against an incumbent, Dorothy Fleming, God rest her soul. Wonderful woman. But when another candidate got in the race to run in the race, it was my late father who called me and said, you just won. And I said, why? He goes, because you got a third candidate in the race.

[00:24:32] And it was my dad, the bean counter, the CPA, the accountant who explained to me was going through the numbers with me. I went by his office and he explained like we were going through the numbers because he was helping me with my count. And every good dad does, helps their kid with their political counts. And the third, there was a third, the three party. It was the third candidate in the race. Now I remembered it from Ventura in 98. I worked on Coleman's race in 98.

[00:24:58] And so one of the questions I was going to have you ask of you is with three candidates in the race, it really changes how we discuss this race. Because I could see a scenario where Tafoya wins, where White wins or Schwarzian wins. Undecided is not going to win. In the governor's race, I could see a situation where Dameth wins, Lindell wins or Qualls wins.

[00:25:22] So that's why when there's three candidates in the race, it's such, it's not as, it's more complicated to analyze and break down. Is that fair? A hundred percent. Because I think that people, just like we talked about after the conventions, people like to choose someone, right? And so now I have known to write in occasionally. I think that write-ins are largely when someone's trying to be silly and like write in their best friend or something.

[00:25:52] Or maybe nerds like me who, and you, who have like strong opinions that we don't want to cast our vote for somebody. The folks in the middle, I feel like go to the polls looking to choose someone. And so with that third candidate in the race, it just completely switches. Like those 24 and 27 votes in those two races, those undecideds are going to go somewhere. And if they all go together, that's the game, right? So it is one of the reasons I also am personally grateful that Dameth got in.

[00:26:21] Because as we see from this 10-point difference between Lindell and Qualls here, unclear if those Dameth voters would go strictly to Qualls. But I do, I am grateful that there is a third party in both of these races. And that Ventura thing, I have a historical context. Third candidate, not third party. I'm sorry, third candidate. We have a, I have a historical context that we'll discuss. Yeah. Fantastic. I just, I wanted to make clear you weren't getting all third party-ish on me.

[00:26:47] Let's talk about after Republican women, if they are choosing race white and I might have a different feel on that. So when we get closer, I think the best I'm going to be able to do is say who I would be surprised would win. I don't, because again, I don't like the prediction game since I blew it in 16, but a lot of people did. And so what I'd like to do is just to. All posters. Well, I, what I, I also, as I get, I think that when there's.

[00:27:18] I also have come to realize that it's difficult to predict. People may have a belief what they think is going to happen, but to predict and know. And I want our listeners to have informed discussion, like to learn, learn a little bit from what we're talking about. And I honestly can tell you again, when it comes to any of these primaries, I cannot tell you today who I think is going to win. But it's easier for me to say what would surprise me. Right. And I think that's the fairest way for me to talk about it.

[00:27:47] You apparently are a know-it-all and you know exactly what's going to happen. So I just have to shut up and listen to you. Obviously. No, I, I think that's a great way to look at it. And I think as we learned from December and January, who knows what's going to happen in the next 90 days, you know, or two months before, before the primary. I mean, we could see some huge things occurring in the state, in the world, in the personal lives of these candidates.

[00:28:14] And so, again, nerding out, we're in an election year. We're going to be chatting about this. So moving over to the DFL side, we have Craig at 45%, Flanagan at 33%, and Undecided at 17%. I wasn't expecting as large of a gap when I look at this race between Craig and Flanagan. And I thought, you know, five, eight points is what we would see in summer polls. Was this a little bit, did you have any takeaways from this split?

[00:28:42] I was exactly as surprised as you were on the exact same point. I was like, whoa, do I have my glasses on? Because I'm old now and I need readers and contacts. And I'm like, whoa, that was, that was surprising. Also surprising to me in this is not all of the kind of, when we look into the demographics, younger voters are Flanagan, older voters are Craig, more liberal are Flanagan, moderates are Craig. I mean, none of that is surprising.

[00:29:08] But with 17% undecided, that's nearly one in five who have not made up their minds of someone who is a sitting congresswoman and are sitting lieutenant governor. That to me is crazy. I know that the math, I know that figuring out that 17% is nearly one in five, it's still impressive math to me. Okay. So great job. So shifting into attorney general race, this is one where I feel like I don't want to speak for you. You can speak for yourself, but where Republicans often see.

[00:29:38] Imagine if I said that. What? Imagine if I said that. I don't want to speak for you. You can speak for yourself. Bravo. I'll take it. I was saying. Put that lady on a pedestal. That's right. Exactly. But we have Ellison at 44, Schultz at 37. Wait a second. I say that all the time. I always say, I don't want to speak for you. I know. You do. That's right. You do a great job. Thank you. And undecided again at almost 20% in this race.

[00:30:04] So there's nothing really too wild about this other than, I got to say, for the Republican endorse candidate, having 37% to me is, he doesn't have a huge name ID. And so I think that is, this is one where, you know, I think Republicans like to have a lot more optimism than some of the statewide races.

[00:30:29] What I read, what I was interested about this poll was this to me is the fraud. This to me is fraud. And I looked at it as when I saw, first of all, this had to been like a Christmas week for you because there was a couple of polls that came out. Then campaign finance reports. You must have been just bursting at the seams. I know. I view this as kind of like, this is the fraud impact. And when I saw the Ellison numbers, I was a little surprised.

[00:30:57] But one of the things that we've consistently talked about, and here's the reason why I was surprised. But first of all, one of the things that we've kind of consistently talked about is that when Walls was in the race and then got out, one of the arguments that we made, again, I don't speak for you, was that he would have won, but down ballot, there would have been some issues. And so that fraud, just because you remove Walls from the ticket, Governor Walls from

[00:31:23] the ticket, doesn't mean you remove fraud as an issue away from the ticket. And the Ellison number and the Flanagan number, I viewed that as the fraud number, meaning that's the fraud effect on these races. Because if you go back and listen to the deep and thoughtful archives of the Breakdown with Rod Kronbecki, we've also said that the attorney general's race represents a good opportunity for Republicans to win.

[00:31:52] And that fraud is going to be an issue. So if you take those data points of like, Walls was, as I consistently said, Walls, there was no poll that showed that Walls was losing. But we collectively think that Walls is getting out of the race. We think he's getting out of the race because of some of the fraud issues and some down ballot matters. Okay.

[00:32:16] So I view the Ellison and Flanagan numbers, which were surprising, as kind of the fraud number. And so the question I have is, is this, are we seeing a data point that fraud? Because the Lieutenant Governor is running for the United States Senate. And I have consistently said, and I think you have too, is that fraud is still, fraud is front and center in that race because it comes out of the question, what did she know?

[00:32:46] When did she know to what she, what did she do? And on the debate, I think it was very fascinating on the debate on Almanac, which we can get to in a later point. I think we're going to, we're going to talk about this episode, right? We can get into some of that about the ownership of the fraud issue, but I think this is the fraud number. That's what my take is that this is the fraud effect. And so Ron Schutz, not great name ID, but this is closer than other races on the head to head.

[00:33:15] I agree. And I think as we kind of continue through the polls and talk about the issues and the walls of it all, I think that kind of is apparent of, of how big this is truly for Minnesota voters. Because yeah, I just think, I mean, Ellison's gets beat up as tied to it, even though they're trying not to be. And like you said, we'll talk about that more about Flanagan. But I think if Republicans can keep that at the forefront and Craig keep that at the forefront

[00:33:41] and really make sure that voters continue to care about fraud and be worried about fraud as we move through the next five months, I think it could make a difference in a variety of races. Moving into the Star Tribune, CARE 11, U of M, Mason-Dixon poll. So this was June 11th or 8th through the 10th. This was general election voters. And so with this, we got matchups. We got favorability and some of those issues.

[00:34:05] So looking at the governor's race, when we look at Klobuchar versus Dameth, it's 48-40. Klobuchar versus Qualls is 48-37. And Klobuchar versus Lindell, she jumps up to 53 percent to 36 percent. So, and the undecideds range from 11 to 14 percent here. I will say that the party breakdown of this poll is identified as 38 percent Democrat, 31 percent Republican, 31 percent Independent.

[00:34:33] So me wanting to put on my rose-colored glasses here, I want to look at that and say they oversampled Dems by 7 percent. So Klobuchar would be Dameth at 48-40 percent. Can we point to those numbers? Are you putting rose-colored glasses on or are you putting blinders on? How do you work through that number? Minnesota is a blue state. There's more Democrats than there are.

[00:34:56] If you're going to do a true sample of the state, you can't make Minnesota a—you have to—when you poll, you have to poll the state. And you can't have the poll over—you can't have it over—I mean, it's—Republicans haven't won a statewide election in 20 years. So you're just saying they have a bigger pool to poll from, and that's going to be also evident in the general election. I get it. Well, yeah. I mean, the poll has to reflect the voting trends of the state.

[00:35:24] I mean, Democrats have consistently won elections by some double digits. When you sample in the state, you have to poll based on what the electorate is. That would be my argument. Yeah. And I just like to look—for me, I also—I just—yeah. I like to try to find my ways of being optimistic. You know, we've talked a lot about historical context, midterm elections, gas prices, conflicts,

[00:35:51] ice fraud, you know, everything that's going to play into this. And, you know, it doesn't look awesome for Republicans as a whole up and down the ticket. I want to remain optimistic and hope that we can get across the finish line. And this is one situation that I have hoped that Damath can do it. You know, and I think Klobuchar has won significantly in every race, you know, and has the money advantage, which we'll get to.

[00:36:19] But I do think that there, you know, crazier things have happened. And so I want to remain cautiously optimistic that in a statewide race and maybe even governor or Senate Republicans can pull it out. And I think it's also—I think you make a really good point about being optimistic. I think it's important that I don't tamper that down and—because I'm an internal optimist. And so my objective in kind of pushing back a little bit on that is not to tamper down the

[00:36:47] enthusiasm because we would not have a good show if we were not enthusiastic and optimistic and no one wants to listen to the plane going down every episode. But I think it's a fair point. You know, I think that there are—I, like I said, am going to try to remain optimistic as we move forward. But I think being realistic and your thoughts on some of this, especially, again, as we look at historical context is important. So we'll continue to show that.

[00:37:15] And what do—where do you think—like on that poll where you were bringing up the oversampling by seven, where do you think—where would you think—where would be the sweeter spot for you? To me, when we look at it—because you make a very good point about how polls actually work and need to reflect the electorate. I also do want to look, you know, if we were just talking about—because with the enthusiasm on both sides and unclear what it's really going to do, we know Klobuchar also has run

[00:37:44] relatively unopposed in a lot of these races. And so will she be challenged a lot more? Will we see some of the presidential hiccups that come of her not being, you know, so good on the stump? And some of those things come up unclear. So obviously, if we see a breakdown that's 33-33-33 and how that comes out when we're looking at a mix of demographics and where they actually land, I love—I love to see something like that. But like you said, Democrats have been winning Minnesota.

[00:38:12] There are more voters right now that seem to—to veer that way. And so it is understandable that this is more reflective of what a general election would or could look like. I think it is good that we just talked about that way because I don't want—we—you and I are not—we are not U.N. observers in these elections. We are not wearing the blue helmets on the battlefield and we don't get situated. We have a side.

[00:38:38] And so I think it's important that both you and I respect each other's perspective where they're coming from. And I will tell you that tampering down your enthusiasm and your points is not something that I'm going to do. On the flip side, where I'm struggling this election cycle is not with your enthusiasm. The one thing I find—and I had some interesting meetings over the last couple weeks, and the

[00:39:07] podcast came up a lot, and the dynamic that was discussed between you and I. I have no—there is—if you think of, like, the plane going down, I don't think that's what's happening right now. So I'm going to not bring up the plane reference too many more times. But there's a difference between being optimistic and looking at data points and reckless hyperbole.

[00:39:32] I don't think anything that you've ever done on any one of these episodes, nor do I think I have, has ever been reckless hyperbole. I think if we have biases, we will discuss them. We all have biases in some way. But I think what I constantly hear feedback about our podcast is how down the middle we are. And one thing that I promise you that I will not do is I will not tamper down enthusiasm in any sense of the way.

[00:39:59] I want to be—because this is half of your show. And so I'm not going to be Debbie Downer, wah-wah, every time you say something. But I'm interested—what I do consider you to be very much so is an intellectual—my arguments about life, about politics, my conversations have gotten remarkably better since I started doing this podcast with you.

[00:40:26] And we'll talk off air about one of those situations that came up. But—and so I don't want—I want to kind of spar a little bit. And so I don't want the enthusiasm. I just want to trust you that I'm not going to damper that enthusiasm. You're not going to steal my sparkle? Not one bit. Is that a thing? Yeah. That's—women talk about that a lot in like after a breakup that they stole their sparkle. They're getting their sparkle back. Yeah.

[00:40:55] I'm not going to—whatever that means, I'm not going to steal your sparkle. I'm not going to do that. Again, you're half of the show and I'm half of the show. And we get that opportunity to kind of say our piece. I'm not going to, as you would say, steal the sparkle. I appreciate that. I also think that there is a difference of my rose-colored glasses and wanting to be optimistic because I do want to continue to have faith in what the future of our state and country look like and all of that.

[00:41:22] I have been in that, you know, extreme hyperbole also situation working on campaigns. One, for example, that in summer months post-primary, Canada was down by 14 percent. And having to go out and still talk to the press as though we are going to win this thing. You know, there's a time and a place and I've played that role. And so this is different. And so looking at it, you know, I understand we're still looking at an uphill battle, but I still think pigs can fly.

[00:41:52] And they have twice here in the United States in the last couple of elections. But to the degree which you and I generally don't talk about production on air. I think we just had like a really good production, like here's going to be your lane, what you're going to do. And it's incumbent upon me to respect that enthusiasm. And I need to not be so dour every time and just get that space because you've earned it and I've earned it. And that's what makes this work.

[00:42:19] Well, but I don't want to discount because I do think also you have been in this world for decades. You've seen all of these different things go through. Hey, I've been in it for almost decades. I have. So like, you know, you've seen different things. You look at things a little bit differently and have, I mean, your historical context, I think, is always fascinating. So we'll continue to break this down as it relates to previous cycles, as it relates to money and funding and where we're seeing candidates and all of that.

[00:42:47] And I am so excited. As we move into U.S. Senate, we have, they did a generic ballot that is, has DFL at 49, Republicans at 41, undecided at 9. Again, this is just because there's two candidates in the left and three on the right or more on the right. And so I think kind of tracks in most exactly with what the Klobuchar-Damith numbers are. Nothing too surprising there.

[00:43:12] When we look at some of the geographic breakdown, though, on the Senate generic, we see exactly what we know. DFL is 73 percent in the Hennepin-Ramsey counties. GOP is 16 percent. Northern Minnesota, we have GOP at 57, DFL at 34 and similar in Southern Minnesota. Metro suburbs, the breakdown in the generic ballot is 44 percent DFL, 45 percent GOP. This is what we've been talking about for four years, right? Like, it's the suburbs.

[00:43:42] It's the suburbs, baby. I knew you were going to say that. That little movement up and down the ballot in the suburbs per suburb is going to be—it's just going to be fascinating how House races and Senate races could potentially maybe move upwards and help if there's good candidates and good electives in those areas and opposite if there are bad ones. The suburbs are where people need to talk, where they need to appeal, and where they need to be in having conversations.

[00:44:11] And I just—I think that number is how we got a split legislature, right? Yes. And that's where I think candidate selection—I would say—and push back if you think I'm wrong. I think that's why—maybe without naming the candidates, but I think it's fair to say that candidate selection in the GOP primaries will have a huge impact on this. I think that the Democrats do not have that problem.

[00:44:40] Yeah. I think that if Klobuchar is going to get through, but I think if Craig and or Flanagan get through the primary, they're not going to have the same type of potential issues that could be if the roulette—or if the slot machine comes up in a particular way on the Republican side.

[00:45:02] Well, and I think—let's chat about that a little bit more, because when we look at the favorables, unfavorables in the Senate race, we have Flanagan, 33% favorable, Craig, 28% favorable. So Craig has five—is 5% less favorable than Flanagan. Unfavorable, Flanagan's at 39%. Favorable, Craig, is at 27%. So Flanagan might have 5% more favorables, but has 12 points more unfavorables.

[00:45:30] And so this is kind of one of those where we—when we look at the left, it's almost like—because, you know, we saw that Craig's winning that primary battle in the other pool. It's kind of like, well, I like Peggy, but I think Angie can and should win, is kind of how I break that down. I mean, I just think the unfavorables—and again, is that the fraud component that we discussed a little bit? I think it could be. I also will tell you that, as I've said before, I think that Craig and or Flanagan—

[00:46:00] Craig and Flanagan are—all of the kind of nonpartisan rankings of the Senate race show that this is a likely D seat or a safe D seat, meaning the Democrats are going to retain control of it. It's not a toss-up in any rankings that are going on. And so what I think that means is that if Flanagan or Craig are the nominee, they are likely to win.

[00:46:23] But I do believe that Craig is the strongest of the candidates in terms of—for the Democrats, in terms of not having fraud come up. Because, again, I go back to wanting to always try to be as consistent as I can. While no polls showed that Walls was losing, he got out of the race in part because of fraud down ballot.

[00:46:47] And so having his lieutenant governor as the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate brings fraud back in, creates problems up and down the ticket. Now, on the flip side, obviously, energizing, endorsed candidate, there's a whole number of—there's always—there's pluses and minuses to candidates. But I think Craig is much more difficult to connect in any way, shape, or form to fraud.

[00:47:16] And then particularly with all the messaging that the Republicans have done about how she works across party lines and is able to work with people, that's where I think some of this messaging, some of this cutesy messaging, respectfully, that House Majority Whip Emmer put out that tweet, it will rebound and bounce back if Craig is the nominee.

[00:47:39] And so that's where I think Craig is the one—I think that she's—I think amongst Republicans, I would say they do not want to run against Craig. Having Angie Craig and Amy Klobuchar at the top of the ticket is, like, a really, really tough scenario for Republicans. Is that fair? We'll chat about that a little bit more.

[00:48:03] I think so, especially—I've run up against Angie Craig in CD2 back in the day, and so she is a formidable opponent for sure, especially with now eight years of Congress under her belt. So, yeah, that one I just am fascinated to watch, and we're going to chat briefly, debate at the end here. Now, moving into Walls, you just mentioned, you know, prior to him dropping out of the race, no poll had showed him losing. These numbers are—I don't know if you saw any of these, but these numbers aren't great for Walls.

[00:48:31] We have 39 percent approval, 53 percent disapproval, lowest approval rating in six years as governor. And then, for context, a year ago, June 2025, he was at 49 percent approved, 50 disapproved. Now he's at 39 approved, 53 percent disapproved. So that is about a 10-point drop in a single year. When we look at independents, 32 percent approve, 55 disapprove.

[00:48:58] And then when we look at Democrats, 73 percent disapproved—I'm sorry, and 17 disapprove. Any of this shocking to you? In particular, what I will say is shocking to me is the fact that, again, nearly one in five Democrats are disapproving of Governor Walls. None of this is surprising to me. Okay. I think that this has been—it is amazing how things can change, particularly, Becky.

[00:49:27] I mean, we look at the last four years. I mean, the history that we've had over our podcast over the last four years. But how much they've changed in the last four months, the last five, six, seven months. This does not surprise me. I'm not surprised by any of this. When we look at those demographics, again, Hennepin, Ramsey, Walls is still very popular, almost 60 percent approved, 31 percent disapproved. Metro Suburbs is where we start to see that flip. 30 percent approved and 55 percent disapproved. That would have been very troublesome.

[00:49:58] Northern Minnesota and Southern Minnesota, again, are a quarter approved, three quarters disapproved, roughly. So, you know, I think it is—you know, I think he made the best choice. I think that it would have been interesting seeing some of this had he still been running. And the thing that I will say is the most interesting to me about this is Walls versus Trump numbers. Because Trump technically has a higher approval rating in Minnesota than Governor Walls. I'm not surprised by that. Really?

[00:50:27] I'm not surprised by that because I think that part of the reasons Walls' numbers is low is because of fraud. And I'm not surprised that Trump's number is a little bit higher. I'm just not. I think that Walls has—I think what we are seeing is we are seeing the—if we are to believe there was some data that was—that drove some of the decision to get him out or helped inform him on his decision not to run for re-election,

[00:50:56] I think it's starting to show up in the polls right now. So, again, elections are not held in a vacuum, and to be consistent, Walls would have had to run against someone. There's no reason to think he wouldn't have been well-funded, well-organized. It would have been a real tough re-election. I think he would have won, but I think it would have been tough.

[00:51:15] But I think we're seeing the data—I think we're seeing in these media polls that have come out the data that I believe was likely one of the factors in him getting out of the race, is that this was going to be a tough election cycle with his name there. And he was doing something that was historic, a third term from a governor, for a third four-year term from a governor. And I think the election would have been really tough.

[00:51:45] I think he would have won, but I think it would have been a real tough election up and down the ballot. I want to get into some of these issues real quick because we, man, are chatting away. But that historical context, it just—again, I think this is an exception, not the rule. Jesse Ventura was trailing in June and July, heading into the 1998 election. We had Norm Coleman leading most of the time, Hubert Skip Humphrey leading or competitive most of the time.

[00:52:14] Ventura was often running in third, down by 15-ish points. And the election result had him come out 37% to 35% at Coleman and 28% to Humphrey. So that is really, as I kind of tried to dig into it, the only, like, main, you know, big comeback that we've seen. Also, a third party in a general election is a whole different ballgame, but wanted to throw that in there. And then issues.

[00:52:40] I think this was pretty much what we probably could have predicted when we looked at issues, economy and inflation. Number one, fraud in state programs. Number two, crime and public safety. When asked what the single issue will be most important when voting this year, nearly 40% of Minnesotans said inflation and the cost of living. And then when we break down a little bit of these issues. So fraud, 54% very concerned, 27% somewhat concerned, which is 81% expressing concern.

[00:53:09] And that number for a non-social issue is really high in a poll. And so I think, as you mentioned, this is fraud coming out and how that plays into these other races, how Craig ties that to Flanagan, how folks tie that to Ellison, and also how it reflects on day myth and legislative leaders that are running for the House and Senate will be interesting. Nothing too crazy there. Republicans, this was, this is where a little interesting for me.

[00:53:37] What party do voters trust more to reduce fraud? Republicans, 45%. Democrats, 38%. Democrats' whole mantra for years has been the competence, right? The, we are the best to govern and that's who we are. In this issue, one of the most important in the cycle, Republicans are given an edge. Is that because of the Democrat governor that this, you know, umbrella of fraud is sitting over?

[00:54:05] Or what else can you attribute this to? I think it has to be. And please push back and answer yourself too, which is, is do you think, I think it has to be because fraud has occurred. We had representative Garofalo on, or on our last episode. And he mentioned very directly that fraud has been going on for a very, very long time. And, but the chief executives of the state, when it's been going on, have been Democrats.

[00:54:33] And the constitutional officers that have been Democrats. While there's been, Republicans have flipped and won and there's been some turnover in the legislature where Republicans had a majority. I think what we're seeing is that on the issue of fraud, that it is being, I think, appropriately assigned the bulk of the responsibility to Democrats when they're in office. And so that is not surprising.

[00:55:02] The opportunity that it presents is, is can Republicans get a message to mobilize the voters on that? And I think when we get into campaign finance reports in a bit, we'll talk about some of that disparity. But this is a clear opportunity for Republicans on the issue of fraud. But if you look at some of the other issues, immigration, the economy, gas prices, that's where there's going to be Republicans are going to be running up again to some resistance.

[00:55:33] I completely agree. All right. Anything else poll related you want to get into here before we chat? Money, money, money. The only thing I would say about polls was the disapproval of the state flag. Oh, yeah. I think that was, it is amazing to me how this issue has come up. 50% disapproves. You can, I mean, in this state, 50%.

[00:55:57] And so, boy, as much as I don't, as much as I don't get into the conspiracy about what country the flag looks like and all the other stuff, it is very clear to me that having a new debate about a state flag and inviting the public more into the process would be very popular. And I think it's something that we should do. We are a state.

[00:56:26] Folks may not know this, but we had two constitutions at one point. And so, because of disagreements. And so, restarting the flag and going having that debate again would be totally on brand for Minnesota. I agree. It seems, I mean, how far are we at beyond this two years? And it's still. Yes. It's such a dominating conversation piece for both parties. So, all right.

[00:56:54] We'll be getting more polls, I have to imagine, as we move closer to the primary. So, I'm excited to see that. Campaign finance. This is the time where we get all of those lovely reports of what candidates in the state of Minnesota have raised, what they've spent, what they have for debt, what they have cash on hand. And so, we're going to walk through that. Starting out with Senator Amy Klobuchar, she raised over $7 million since launching her campaign in January.

[00:57:24] That is to overcome. She is dead of $62,000, has spent $3.19 million and cash on hand $3.8 million. Michael, go forward and conquer. I've seen some tweets from you on this. I think you have some thoughts. I think it is. And I will share mine, too. Okay. Why don't you go first this time? Okay, I will go first. I think this is really no surprise. Klobuchar has always been a massive fundraiser. We knew that she was going to transfer that over to this.

[00:57:52] I think it is. It's hard to argue against this because not only does she have this money, but if she needs outside groups, they would come in for her, I believe. The only. So aside from looking at the facts that $3.8 million versus the top Republican cash on hand of $500,000 is really hard to combat. But I am curious of what she has gotten, how she's moved the needle for that $3.19 million that she spent.

[00:58:22] Because I haven't seen a lot. Except you're winning in every poll by massive margins. So maybe it may be as it just door to door combat already. Yeah. I mean, she's investing in an infrastructure. She's building and spending money. I am more interested. So I always look, I'm more interested in where candidates are spending their money sometimes versus how they're written. Because you have to run and spend money.

[00:58:46] I mean, we've broken down the numbers before about how much needs to be raised, how much needs to be spent. And so I'm curious where she's spending money. She spent $3.1 million already running for governor in this state. And that is significant. And she's coming in with this career in the U.S. Senate, coming into the governor's race, raising an extensive amount of money and has more to spend.

[00:59:14] And the closer we get to election and the more that the polls consistently show her leading, I think that gap is going to grow. She's dominating in every way in this race right now. Yes. When we turn over to the Republican side, we have Kendall Qualls, I'm sorry, raised $211,000. He spent $294,000. Has debt of $37,000, which was a loan he gave at the campaign.

[00:59:43] And has $34,000 cash on hand. Raising $200,000. It's just, I mean, these numbers, you have $34,000 cash on hand is just heading into a primary. It's just really hard to come back for. Correct. I don't think anyone, I don't think, I don't think Lind, Lindell or Qualls are in a good position.

[01:00:06] Speaking specifically about Qualls, what he can rely on is he can rely on the party's endorsement. And the things that the party does to help boost the endorsed candidates. It would be in classic party form for the least funded candidate to make it through the primary. It would be in classic Republican to have the least funded candidate get through the primary.

[01:00:32] And so this is where, this is why being smart about how you spend money coming up to the convention. The other thing that doesn't happen, and I keep bringing this up, which is when a candidate gets endorsed, there's not a dumpster full of cash that shows up to the convention. They don't get a massive influx of cash. And one of the things, we can talk about it a bit more when we go through the rest of the numbers, but yes, Qualls is the endorsed candidate and he has the least amount of money.

[01:01:00] And what you'll hear from people is, well, he's endorsed, the party's going to do all these things, and all this money's going to come in. It never happens. And so having the Republican endorsed candidate for governor with that low amount of money should be, and with the polls where they're at, where we're looking at, one of three candidates that could possibly make it through, that's a challenge. Yeah. I mean, I think also, you know, there was a Star Tribune article about

[01:01:28] where he's spending his money, and I don't necessarily know that it's on direct voter contact. And so this is the time that that starts to happen. And so maybe we will see a shift. Maybe we will see an influx of donors coming out of that. But it's hard to see that's payroll for maybe a couple weeks here. That's, it's not enough. Coming from the election, because these reports go through the end of May, so obviously that does now. These reports go through the end of March. End of March. Yes.

[01:01:58] I apologize. So, you know, coming through the last couple of months, the endorsement and everything might tell a different story that we'll see after quarter two. But who knows? Then we look at Lindell. He raised $648,000, which is, I mean, not nothing. And he spent $717,000, has just $12,000 cash on hand.

[01:02:24] Since December, he has spent over $250,000 to purchase copies of his memoir, What Are the Odds, from Crack Addict to CEO. He gave books to all of the delegates. He says he's using them instead of campaign flyers. What? It. He's also giving her away. I also handed out my pillows at a recent event. I just, oh, he also, one of his largest expenses this year was a February fundraising event.

[01:02:52] At President Donald Trump's Palm Beach, Florida Club Mar-a-Lago, the campaign, Lindell's campaign spent over $155,000 to rent the facility for food and beverage. So I don't have a problem with the renting the facility because, assuming he makes money. So if Klobuchar spent $100,000 for some massive event that brought in a couple hundred thousand or a million dollars, that would still be extravagant, but I wouldn't really care.

[01:03:18] What makes the Lindell facility numbers stick out and why it's reasonable to bring up is because what has it gotten him? He hasn't, it didn't bring him in, bring him a bunch of money. I would say about the books as an award-winning true crime author, and I would have loved to have had a slush fund that I could use to buy books and just rack up sales. This is a, this doesn't make a ton of sense. I get the argument.

[01:03:48] I'm really, I'm really trying to be fair here. I get the argument that Lindell's trying to make about his life story is what is, why he's running. And I think it's great that he's overcome addiction issues and other types of stuff. That being said, buying the books, when you could have a detailed summary on your website, people could, you could give e-copies to.

[01:04:17] There's a whole variety of ways in which you could do this where it's not that much money. Because I'm trying to balance his story, but it's just a lot of money. And again, what he can show for it is he's leading in a primary poll from one station. I hope it doesn't work.

[01:04:39] So, I mean, this, those two numbers, that event and the books make is $400,000, over $400,000 that this year he has spent on not direct voter contact. Over half of his dollars was not spent on consultants or mailers or anything. It was spent, I mean, and I get it. A story is important. We know Angie Craig, you know, lived at a, her parents, you know, I believe lived in a trailer park. We know Peggy Flanagan was on food stamps. We know those stories. They're important.

[01:05:08] And they are certainly part of the story of why we elect officials. But you have to balance that with your forward-looking policy stances. I mean, he said something this week when asked a policy question that, like, his answer is that he's friends with Trump. You need to have positions. You need to have a path. You need to have also how you're going to govern, how you're going to legislate, and how this is going, you're going to move things forward. And simply telling people your story doesn't cut it. Yes. Boil it down to five bullet points.

[01:05:37] Put it on a mailer like everybody else. And let's move on. Yeah. I mean, he's, I would have thought, look, Lindell is spending money in unique ways, unconventional ways. Will it work? I don't know. I hope, I don't know. Because you're right about the voter contacts. He's also a known brand, high name ID.

[01:05:58] I'm trying to figure out how, as much as, what I'm trying to get to is, is he's spending money in a way that is consistent with his brand to help him through the primary. He has a little bit of a different, so he has a fundraising mechanism. He has a grassroots operation. He has that kind of, that kind of e-business that he can do. So he can tap into that.

[01:06:28] He has a, you know, because of his association with, you know, the president and his other things, I think he has probably the strongest nationwide, probably small dollar, donor, small dollar, excuse me, small dollar donor list. And so I would have thought he would have probably raised a little bit more than what he did. He's spending it in unconventional ways. And as you noted, they're not voter contacts.

[01:06:54] But I don't know necessarily that, I'm not trying to justify it or explain it away, but I don't know that Mike Lindell is necessarily a tent builder and like bringing people into the fold. And so I think what you've very well pointed out is that he has spent money to appeal to activists and a small group of grassroots activists in the state. He's very hyper-focused, targeted on that. Will it help him? I don't know.

[01:07:23] But, you know, he certainly isn't raising money at the level which he should. If he's, if he's, if he becomes a nominee and the same with quals, they're not in a position right now to compete with Klobuchar's money. When we then turned to Speaker Demet, she raised $360,000, spent $285,000, zero debts and ended with $517,000 cash on hand. Your take.

[01:07:48] I like seeing three digits or six digits in, in that number versus five digits. As we discussed, that's still, you know, Klobuchar has millions. And so that is something that we need to, she needs to continue to get those funds, get those, get that money in the door. We did see a big influx of spending on a third party group on her behalf. And so I think that is something that we would probably still be seeing. I think they spent over a million dollars so far.

[01:08:18] We've, you know, the, the Superman ads. So I think spending that much money early, if it can continue, could balance things out. But unclear how much money from outside groups will come in and how much in the next two months before the primary election. So I think that's fair. You know, my point on social media was that if the math works out, roughly 1.4 approximately, it could be more.

[01:08:47] Let's remind, let's be precise about something. So she had cash on hand, $517,000 through the end of March. April and May were expensive months for the, for all of these campaigns. And so I don't know what their totals are right now, but they, all of the campaigns came into expensive months on the Republican side, a little bit on the Democratic side too. I mean, Klobuchar did, but she's got much more margin of error.

[01:09:13] So I'd be very curious what the cash on hand total is today, leaving the convention, because one of the things that I've consistently been critical of is candidates spending so much money on these endorsements. And then winning the endorsement and coming out of it with not a lot of money to spend is pretty consistent. Again, I worked in a campaign, first campaign, Boschwitz for US Senate in 96, went to the convention, didn't get endorsed. There was no endorsement.

[01:09:39] We spent money, we had chips and salsa in our hospitality suite, which was a hotel room. We didn't spend a ton of money. I remember like chips and salsa and the other candidates, you know, Mackesy and Reno, they, Twilliger, they had much more elaborate suites. We just didn't spend a lot of money on that.

[01:10:00] And so the opulent spending is a problem, particularly when candidates spend all that money and then they leave the convention and they have to raise. The problem I would point out with Dameth is they spent approximately like 1.4 million between her campaign and allied groups on the endorsement and didn't win. And they got, she had 815 votes that works out to roughly $1,700 per vote.

[01:10:25] And so the question is, what's the argument for the donors that gave to that money that ran television ads and they weren't successful? How do you go back to those donors and say, keep spending because the likelihood of her winning the primary is better? I think that they were significantly banking on the endorsement and getting winning the endorsement and springboarding into the primary. And so I don't know.

[01:10:53] I think it's open to debate as to whether all of the money that was there for her prior to the endorsement is all going to come into play because the math has gotten harder for her to win the primary. Well, I'll put on my perspective of this because I look at that and I saw those ads almost daily. You saw those ads. I got a text from my aunt saying, is this Dameth spending this? Is what's this, what's this PAC doing? How does this all work?

[01:11:22] So while it was pre-endorsement and certainly with a goal of emphasizing to the endorsement audience, that wasn't just targeted towards 2,500 people, right? It wasn't just mailers into their phone calls, text messages, digital ads into those delegates. All of Minnesota was seeing this. So I think that we have to be able to attribute some of those millions to some of these voters.

[01:11:45] Obviously, if she didn't go to a primary and was just done, then that spending per delegate would be, I think, reflective of the $1,700 per delegate that was spent and didn't get under the endorsement and her campaign was over. But I think there is something for folks that saw those ads about her being the superhero, being a leader in the end of session and working on behalf of Republicans and Minnesotans. A lot of people have already seen that as we move forward.

[01:12:13] So if that money stays and continues, I think that it can translate. But we also know that money and races, as you get closer to primaries, as you get closer to elections, these groups, whether just a specific Daymuth PAC or other outside groups, have to, you know, winnow down who they're spending money on, what races they're targeting to try to push over the finish line.

[01:12:39] And so unclear if millions will continue in this, unclear if any money will continue, unclear if other candidate or other outside groups will come in for a Qualls or a Lindell. But I do think that that money going had some sort of impact across elected or I'm sorry, across voters, Minnesotans as a whole.

[01:13:01] And I would argue if I was working on this, going back to donors saying, you know, point to that Klobuchar-Daymuth poll as she's the closest one right now. Obviously, we're making a difference. We continue to need your money. That's not an unfair point. That's not an unfair point. And so your argument would be if Daymuth makes it through the primary, that money was then well spent is what you're saying. Yeah. That's fair. That's fair. That's a fair point.

[01:13:31] If she makes it through the primary, then that's a fair point. Yeah. So we'll see. When we turn to the Minnesota legislature, they're doing good. I mean, I was impressed by some of this. The House Democrats raised over $1.1 million, have $1.8 cash on hand. House Republicans have raised just under $500,000, have nearly $1.3 million cash on hand. So they're, you know, just under $500,000 away from House Democrats. Senate Democrats raised $1.1 million, have $2.8 million cash on hand.

[01:14:01] And Senate Republicans raised over a million and have $3 million cash on hand. So cash on hand coming out of this reporting cycle is, what is that math there? Nine, almost over $10 million are sitting in the coffers of just the legislative caucuses. That's impressive. Yes, it is. And I think that, I think trying to be as optimistic as I can be, I think the real street fight in this election cycle is going to be the battle for the legislature.

[01:14:29] I think that's going to be the real street fight. Potentially AG race, but I think we're going to come through some contested primaries where I think the real fighting is going to be. And then it's going to come down to these legislative races. And I think based on the numbers, I mean, I'm trying to do the math in my head. There's relative parity there between the caucuses. And so I think it's going to be, and I think that's going to be a lot, I think it's going to be a real fun opportunity.

[01:14:59] I think we could break down a lot of these races and a lot of these legislative races because, and I think that's where there's going to be a lot of enthusiasm and energy. I think it's going to be fun to break those down. I agree. And I have a comment and a question.

[01:15:14] My question first, which I will also answer, do you have any historical knowledge or, you know, what are your thoughts on this being more of a down ticket up kind of election here in Minnesota versus the other way around? Meaning we're going to see $4 million, $5 million if we don't raise any more money, right? So these numbers are just going to go up.

[01:15:39] But right now it's about $5 million spent on legislative Republicans, $5 million spent on legislative Democrats just from their own coffers. That will have impact up. In particular, I think when it comes to fraud, because I think that's something that Republicans in the legislature and candidates are going to really, really be focusing on. I think that can benefit upticket if they don't fall off, right?

[01:16:02] So, like, if they don't just go and vote state legislature, legislative candidates and fall off and not vote for Senate or governor. Do you know of any other time where it might have been that case? Or in my experience is typically, you know, people come out to vote for governor and vote for U.S. Senate and go down. But with this money and the money that's going to be spent, that's significant. What happened, I think, in 2022 was that Republicans were expecting there to be.

[01:16:32] And if you go back and look at those initial days of our podcast, Becky, we, I think, our margin was we thought someone, we thought a Republican was going to win statewide. One candidate was going to win statewide. We didn't think it was going to be, I don't think it was, we thought it was going to be Jensen or Crockett. But there were other opportunities that the Republicans would very likely keep one of the houses of the legislature, if not both. And it didn't happen that way. The Republicans got swept out. And I think in large part because of the top of the ticket.

[01:16:59] I think there is a organized effort this election cycle to ensure that the legislative races, at least on the Republican side, I can't speak to the Democrats, are a bit more fortified. There's more of a fence around them to help prevent that wave from just wiping everything out at the top.

[01:17:18] And so what I think that the Republicans who are focused on the legislature right now are doing is that they're keeping, and push back if you think I'm wrong, is they're raising a lot of money. They're also, I think, legislative caucuses, particularly the House Republicans, are very interested in who is at the top of the ticket because they don't want that wipeout effect.

[01:17:44] And one of the posts that I made, Dameth was just named to a lead with leadership with the Republican Legislative Campaign Committee across the country. Now, that's not a bad thing, but I found it interesting because you're running for governor and that should be your primary focus. So taking on an election responsibility for legislative races across the country, I thought was interesting. But again, it's, I think they're taking a belts and suspenders approach.

[01:18:14] I think that what happened in 2022, the top of the ticket when Republicans got wiped out, I think that legislative Republicans this election cycle, particularly the House, are taking a much more proactive role in making sure that they can at least sustain some type of flood that may wipe them out on election night. And so that's why I think there's an interest in.

[01:18:36] And I think based on these numbers, there's been a lot of focus on kind of the building blocks up versus just letting it happen. And kind of like the three little pigs, it's the straw house, it's the brick house, and then it's the sticks house. I think Republicans, I always forgot about the sticks. You always remember the straw and the bricks, but you forget about the sticks.

[01:18:58] I think that Republicans are really trying to organize a strong legislative campaign committee and then working up from there. And the Democrats, I think, are going to come down the other way and we'll see where it's going to be the fight in the middle. Is that fair? I think that's very fair.

[01:19:18] I also, you know, I have heard some rumblings that Senator Amy Klobuchar is hoping for a close legislature but would not like a complete trifecta because it would force her hand potentially further to the left than she's comfortable being. So it could be a really interesting to see how all of that works out if there is a complete wipeout. But we can hold that conversation for later.

[01:19:39] Closing out our money chat, Attorney General, Keith Ellison raised $517,000, spent $212,000, has $580,000 cash on hand. Ron Schutz raised $212,000, spent $151,000, has just under $300,000 cash on hand. Not a huge disparity there. Low spending in those down ballot races. And so I think that there's going to be some outside. I mentioned this in the previous episode. Republican Attorney General's Association, I think, has already reserved some time.

[01:20:08] I think there's going to be, there's going to be, I think, a significant, what we would define as significant in Minnesota attempt at winning the Attorney General's race. And so that's going to be one to keep on our radar screen. Absolutely. Especially, again, because we have the fraud. We know that legislative candidates are going to push fraud. We know Craig is using it against Flanagan, and that would translate to Flanagan were to come through the primary.

[01:20:33] And we know that there are attempts in the Attorney General's race as well, especially with the recent oversight report. Some actions by Pete Stauber and the like to hold Ellis and Walls accountable. So I think it will be interesting to see how all of that, in addition to Raga and other groups coming in here. So we love money. We love polls. Sorry for nerding out. So moving over just then to a couple comments on the Craig Flanagan debate.

[01:21:02] Now, as we remember, Craig was pushing for a lot more debates. Flanagan said we've got three post endorsement. They had their first one on Almanac this past Friday. Did you watch? I did. Me too. It was, I thought it was interesting. I think my biggest takeaway from it, I think Flanagan has some work to do in her answers and how she spins out of things.

[01:21:27] And I think in particular, you mentioned the fraud and one of her, you know, when addressed with that, she kind of said, well, Walls said the buck stops with him. So I'm placing that at his feet. Basically asked her answer. I don't know that that's a good enough response. I like a, you know, anytime you can try to pivot off. But you're the lieutenant governor. And so while the buck stops with him, I mean, that's like saying, you know, I guess I don't even have a good example. But something about like, well, my husband did it.

[01:21:53] And even though I was aware of it and it was in our home, it's his fault. It just doesn't work that way. You're the lieutenant governor. You're supposed to have eyes, ears open. And as you're running for other things, you can't just say, well, I'm sorry, you know, the other 49 senators were, the buck was with them. And sorry, I was negligent. It just doesn't work. And so I think that was a really weak point for her. I would absolutely agree.

[01:22:17] I think that, I think that I was surprised by how, and I think you've mentioned this before, like this was the one question you knew was going to come up. We've discussed this before, like in debates and other things like this was the one question that was going to come up. Why that was the best answer you came up with. And so I was disappointed in that answer because we've consistently said, to repeat, consistently said that fraud front and center in the Senate race, if she's a nominee.

[01:22:43] And so it's a fair, I would have thought she would have had a more substantive answer on that issue. And as it was pointed out, Craig took responsibility for mistakes, missed votes. Flanagan did not. And what I think, I think you got to lens a very clear preview of what a general election Angie Craig wanting statewide will be like. And that is a very strong candidate.

[01:23:12] And I don't disagree with that. One thing that did surprise me a little bit more is because I think if I was on Flanagan's team, one of the things to be successful in the primary, you need to knock Craig down. Right. Like you need to shift some of those people who are who like her, who are on her side. We see a 12 point deficit in the recent poll between Craig and Flanagan in the primary. I think that Flanagan did a better job at lobbing bombs than Craig did. And I think she landed some. And I think Craig came back.

[01:23:43] I also think it's just about styles. Right. I think Craig is a little bit more even keeled in how she approaches stuff. She doesn't get super jazzed up about about some of that stuff. She did have some good wins, you know, talked about Flanagan had was criticizing the deep fake AI ad that an outside group spent that has a fake Flanagan. And Craig said, you know what, it's an outside group. I can't say anything. I did say if it was AI, they should take it down, but we can't coordinate.

[01:24:08] But you didn't address the topic about the association your LG association has with corporate money and PACs. And so like she had some good wins coming back. It just wasn't as like snappy or clippable, I think, as some of the Flanagan's ones. And I think Flanagan really tried to almost in every statement she makes get a ding in there against Craig. And to be successful, I think that's what she needs to do.

[01:24:32] I don't know if it's enough, but I think that is a strategy that the Flanagan campaign has that she needs to make sure that she is getting those attacks in when she can. Almanac is an institution, is an institution of its own. And candidates have to do debates and they have to do debates there. The couch dynamic and how you talk makes it sometimes a little awkward because you're talking, it's you're on a couch, it's curved.

[01:24:58] You're sitting there between the hosts and you're answering their questions because you want to look at them. And so a lot of debates are they're up on a podium, they're up on a stage and they're looking into the camera, answering the questions to the moderator more directly. And so it creates having been on Almanac a few times, it creates a little bit of like, how do you turn and look? And so there was some of that also. And, you know, it's just the physicality of how the debate is done.

[01:25:28] You know, that it makes it it was it can sometimes be a very uncomfortable. You would think like, oh, it's a couch. You can sit and just, you know, be on the couch and talk. It's not comfortable. You've got to shift this way. You've got to shift and move. You're turning your back to someone. Yes. And so it's difficult. It's always easier, I think, to be at the podium standing up and talking. I thought it was this is what I will just say about the debate.

[01:25:52] I think that the Senate race on the Senate primary is dominating the airwaves right now. And so to your point about the Dameth money, and I'm always trying to be consistent and be fair. You make a good point about the Dameth money that was spent. So Dameth gets through the primary. All of that money will be well spent. So I've made the point to you, I think on a previous episode, I made a point which said that the spending on the Senate race.

[01:26:23] That will benefit them that contested primary. And so this is just another example. So you made a really good point about the Dameth money and it being of benefit, because if I want to be consistent, because, again, the Senate race is dominating on the on the side. We did a discussion on the ad wars that were going back. I still think we need to tackle that AI discussion for a later episode. But the Almanac debate, Almanac is an institution and it is an important. It's a you got to do it.

[01:26:52] There's going to be more debates. But it was a I think both sides got their points in. But it seems to me that you gave a little bit of a edge to Flanagan. I would say if you're looking at this just as it's one piece of debate, I think Craig answered better.

[01:27:09] If we look at about it in the context of the strategy you need to have at this point in time, I think the only thing that Flanagan can not the only thing, a big thing Flanagan needs to do to be successful in the primary is to move Craig down while she's trying to come up. Right. So I think in that, I think she was successful in doing that. But it's Almanac on a Friday night. So to each their own of how much vision and information this gets.

[01:27:37] But I, you know, as we see, we see a lot of undecideds in all of these races. People are going to start paying attention a little bit more and that's going to start shifting what those numbers actually look like. And my last comment about debates is that I love debates as a campaign staffer. I worked in comms. I love sitting in the back room with my plethora, you know, 50 page document of if they're chatting about this.

[01:28:00] Here's the attack on your opponent and here's your, you know, supporting thing with your fact checks and you're sending out the press releases, fact checking live, all of that. These campaigns were tweeted a couple of times during the debate. They weren't live tweeting. We were like 20 tweets, a debate, getting those dings in, getting that. And so I was a little sad for those staffers that they didn't get that excitement and chaos and stress that comes with that. But that's just more nerding out for me. I love debates and I love a good tweet storm during a debate. That's what you have to do.

[01:28:29] I love that stuff. It's a lot of fun. Yeah. That's all I got. Becky, this was a action-packed, fantastic episode. And thank you again. And I think we figured out kind of our roadmap of how we're going to navigate kind of the analysis and commentary. I think it was very, very productive and a good exercise. So I want to thank you. I want to thank all our listeners for joining us for this episode of The Breakdown with Broadcombecki.

[01:28:53] Before you go, show some love for your favorite podcast by leaving your review on Apple Podcasts or on the platform where you listen. You can also follow us on our website and across all social media platforms at at BBBreakPod. But The Breakdown with Broadcombecki will be back next week. Unless I hurt myself. We'll be back. See you next week. Bye-bye. Stay safe. Bye-bye.