Angie Craig hopes risky strategy will stop Flanagan’s momentum


WASHINGTON – Rep. Angie Craig may be a little down, but she’s certainly not out.

The congresswoman, who is running for retiring Sen. Tina Smith’s seat, bowed out of the state’s Democratic convention Wednesday as it was painfully clear that thousands of delegates who will meet in Rochester on Saturday will show their preference for Democratic rival Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan.

Instead, Craig has made the calculus that aggressively shifting her efforts to a different, much larger pool of Democratic voters who may be more open to her pragmatic type of politics – those who will cast ballots in August’s primary – will reinvigorate her campaign.

“I’m a proud DFLer. Every letter has meaning to me,” Craig said in announcing she would skip the convention. “But the DFL endorsement process just doesn’t reflect the full scope of the party that we are. And the purple state that we have become.”

Craig said most Minnesotans “don’t have the luxury” of time or money to attend a “sub-caucus” and Democrats who don’t attend Saturday’s convention are the voters who matter.

Besides winning the support of a majority of convention delegates, Flanagan has also racked up endorsements from a growing list of fellow progressives – including Smith herself and a slate of other key Democratic senators – and Craig’s campaign looked to be stumbling.

And without the DFL Party endorsement, which will now default to Flanagan, Craig will not have access to state party money and other help, including access to the DFL’s voter rolls.

No matter. Jacob Rubashkin of Inside Elections is among the analysts who are not counting Craig out.

“She has formidable fundraising chops and significant financial resources, and Election Day isn’t until August so she’s got time to deploy them,” Rubashkin said.

Craig has steadily outraised Flanagan when it comes to political money, reporting $4.8 million in cash on hand as of March 31, much more than the $1.1 million Flanagan had in the bank.

“The endorsement isn’t the be-all, end-all of the process, as Gov. (Tim) Walz knows well, and was always going to be an uphill battle for Craig,” Rubashkin said. 

Walz, with running mate Flanagan, lost the party’s endorsement but advanced to win a primary and the governor’s office.

Craig was wounded in her run for the U.S. Senate by some of the votes she took to burnish her bipartisan credentials as she fought for reelection to represent the 2nd Congressional District, a seat that had been held by Republicans for nearly 20 years before Craig won it in 2018.

Flanagan successfully seized on one of those, a vote for the Laken Riley Act, a GOP bill that allows undocumented immigrants arrested for certain nonviolent crimes to be detained and deported.  That vote, taken in January of 2025, a little more than a month before Smith announced her retirement, changed Craig’s political trajectory and rankled many Minnesota Democrats who were subjected in the wake of Operation Metro Surge.

Craig has since said she regretted that vote and has championed immigrant rights. But the political damage was done.

“Craig has made her political career on winning tough general election fights in a swing district. She’s actually never had to run in a Democratic primary before,” said Rubashkin. “So, she’s in unfamiliar waters and the positions she took on things like the Laken Riley Act, which might have helped her in a tough MN-02 re-election campaign are hindering her now.”

Rubashkin also said that another “headwind” Craig is facing is the strong national environment for Democrats and the strength of Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s gubernatorial candidacy.

Craig must promote her “electability” against a GOP opponent – former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya and several other Republicans are vying for Smith’s seat — and argue that keeping that seat in the Democratic column is not guaranteed, Rubashkin said.

“If Democrats aren’t as focused on electability because they see the general election as a safer bet, Flanagan might begin to look more attractive,” he said.

Craig has argued that she is “battle tested” and adept at appealing to increasingly Democratic-leaning suburban voters as well as picking up some support in the Republican-leaning rural areas of her district.

The 2nd Congressional District includes the south Twin Cities metro area and runs south nearly to Mankato, encompassing all of Scott, Dakota and Le Sueur counties as well as parts of Rice and Washington counties.

Dan Hofrenning, a political science professor at St. Olaf College, said Craig’s ability to keep the seat “blue” and even make it safer for other Democratic candidates to run in is a “remarkable achievement.”

“Of all of Minnesota’s eight congressional districts, hers is the most geographically diverse,” he said.

Flanagan, however, has less experience on the campaign trail. She ran unopposed in a special election for a state House seat and ran for lieutenant governor as Walz’s partner.

“Flanagan still has to establish herself as a campaigner,” Hofrenning said, while Craig has won four congressional elections on her own in a district President Donald Trump has carried.

“Experience does matter at this moment in time,” Craig said.

Meanwhile, Flanagan’s campaign says that by skipping the convention, Craig has insulted the DFL base and that this year’s delegates are more reflective of the broader Democratic primary electorate than at any point in recent history, with 57% of delegates attending the DFL State Convention involved in the process for the first time.

“I’m disappointed Rep. Craig chose to leave the process before delegates had the opportunity to cast their votes and have their voices heard,” Flanagan said in a statement.

She was harsher in a post on X.

“If you can’t face your own party, you’re not ready to face a Republican,” Flanagan said.  

Hofrenning said it’s likely progressives will be overrepresented when it comes to the balloting in August’s primary, but the pool of voters will be larger and more diverse. He also said former Gov. Mark Dayton skipped the DFL State Convention and still won his race.

Rubashkin said it may still be too early to determine whether Craig made the right move and whether the lawmaker can best Flanagan in the primary, especially since the political advertising wars have not yet begun.

“Paid media is just beginning,” he said. “There’s a dark money group that’s started to spend a little money on Angie Craig but otherwise the airwaves have been relatively quiet. Let’s see what happens when Craig begins to dip into her 4-1 cash-on-hand advantage.”



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Another day, another politically motivated attack in the United States.

This morning’s shooting at a Dallas ICE detention facility – where a sniper killed two detainees and wounded another before taking his own life prompted me to revisit a question that’s been troubling me: Is political violence actually increasing in America, or does it just feel that way?

To explore this, I’ve conducted what I’ll call a methodological experiment.

Rather than relying on traditional datasets, I’ve used ChatGPT and Claude to construct a synthetic index of political violence in the US since 1945. Let me be absolutely clear: this isn’t conventional data. It’s data generated through language models, with all the limitations that implies.

The Methodology (and Its Limitations)

Here’s what I did: I asked both ChatGPT and Claude to generate lists of politically motivated violent incidents since 1945, then had them score each incident’s severity on a scale where 50 represents a “normal” level.

The models assessed both casualties and symbolic significance, and I used them to cross-check each other’s work. I then quality-checked the output myself and categorised perpetrators by political affiliation where this was clearly established.

This approach is, admittedly, unorthodox. Language models are trained on existing texts and may reflect biases in their training data. They might overweight highly publicised events or recent incidents that featured prominently in their training corpus.

The “data” we’re looking at is essentially a structured synthesis of what these models have absorbed about American political violence.

Yet there’s something intriguing here. These models have processed vast amounts of information about political violence – news reports, academic studies, government documents. Their output might capture patterns that traditional datasets miss, though it might also amplify certain narratives or blind spots.

What the Synthetic Data Reveal

With those caveats firmly in mind, the patterns that emerge from this exercise are concerning. The model-generated index shows a clear upward trend in political violence over the past decade.

Looking at the breakdown by perpetrator ideology (where clearly established), the data suggest that right-wing extremist groups have been responsible for the majority of incidents in recent years, though we cannot draw conclusions about today’s attack whilst investigations are ongoing.

The synthetic data align with some empirical observations. Princeton’s Bridging Divides Initiative recorded over 600 incidents of threats and harassment against local officials in 2024 – a 74% increase from 2022. The University of Maryland found that in the first half of 2025, 35% of violent events targeted U.S. government personnel or facilities – more than twice the rate in 2024.

The Charlie Kirk Assassination and Recent Patterns

The September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk marked a particularly dark moment.

The incident followed numerous recent acts of political violence, including the murder of Minnesota Democratic state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, and two assassination attempts on President Trump in 2024.

What the synthetic data reveal is not just increased frequency but a shift in patterns. While overall levels of physical political violence remained low in 2024 compared to years prior, acts of vigilante violence grew as a proportion of all reported incidents.

We’re seeing less organised group violence and more lone-wolf attacks – a pattern that’s harder to predict and prevent.

The Epistemological Challenge

When we use language models to generate “data” about social phenomena, what exactly are we measuring? We’re essentially extracting structured information from the collective corpus of human writing about these events. It’s aggregating distributed information, but through an AI intermediary rather than traditional data collection methods.

This raises fascinating questions.

The models suggest that right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for a fairly large majority of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001. But how much of this reflects actual patterns versus the way these events are covered and discussed in the sources the models were trained on?

The synthetic data are, in a sense, a mirror of our collective discourse about political violence. They reflect not just what happened, but how we’ve talked about what happened. That’s both a limitation and, potentially, a feature – understanding the narrative landscape around political violence might be as important as counting incidents.

An Experimental Tool

I’ve built an interactive app (using the AI coding tool Lovable) based on this language model-generated violence index.

Users can explore the synthetic data, examine patterns across different time periods and perpetrator groups, and understand the methodology behind it. Think of it as an experiment in using AI to structure historical information rather than a definitive dataset.

The value isn’t in treating this as gospel truth, but in what it reveals about how these events are recorded, remembered, and synthesised in our collective digital memory.

When language models trained on our civilisation’s text output show rising political violence, it tells us something – even if that something is as much about narrative as about underlying reality.

This morning’s tragedy in Dallas reminds us that behind every data point – whether traditionally collected or AI-generated – there are real victims and real consequences. Understanding the patterns, however imperfectly, is the first step toward addressing them.

Try the tool here.





Source link