Minnesota Senate Primary Pits Progressive Peggy Flanagan Against Centrist Angie Craig — A Test Of Democratic Direction

Minnesota’s open Senate seat has become an unexpected focal point for the broader ideological debate roiling the Democratic Party. Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan is campaigning as the progressive, combative alternative to Rep. Angie Craig, a more centrist Democrat who has a record of winning competitive House races. While national leaders including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg have signaled support for Craig, Flanagan has secured endorsements from seven sitting senators — underscoring a notable split inside the party.

A High-Stakes Primary, Low GOP Interest

Although the contest is consequential for Democratic identity and messaging, it is unlikely to decide control of the Senate: Republicans have shown limited interest in contesting the Minnesota seat so far. That dynamic has made the primary the central fight, with both candidates working to define what Democratic leadership should look like going into the next cycle.

Campaigning, Endorsements and Core Arguments

Flanagan has framed the race as a choice between establishment, institution-aligned Democrats and bold progressive fighters focused on working families. She has criticized Craig for voting for this year’s Laken Riley immigration law, arguing that voters “want candidates who are bold and audacious and are sick of politicians who just nibble around the edge.”

Craig’s campaign, through spokesman Antoine Givens, responded: “Minnesotans want a Senator who shows up, is honest, and stands up to special interests. Peggy Flanagan has done none of those things.” Flanagan’s team counters by noting her refusal to accept corporate PAC money and pointing to an active statewide campaign schedule.

Issues Driving The Debate

Key issues in the primary include health care protections and expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies, the role of the filibuster in future Senate strategy, corporate influence in politics, and how Democrats should position themselves to oppose former President Donald Trump. Flanagan has argued Democrats must be willing to fight aggressively on these fronts, while also saying she sees the filibuster as a current check that Democrats should work around by winning majorities.

Interview Excerpts

Burgess Everett: How does this race reflect on the Democratic Party as a whole?

Peggy Flanagan: This race reflects the same tension we see nationally — whether we stick with institutional, corporate-aligned Democrats or choose progressive fighters who deliver for working families.

Burgess Everett: What should happen with the filibuster?

Peggy Flanagan: We need every tool available to push back against what we see as efforts to exploit government for private gain. For now, the filibuster remains, and my priority is helping Democrats win the majorities needed to advance the policies people want.

Burgess Everett: Do Democrats need new leadership?

Peggy Flanagan: People want leaders who will fight for them, show up, and stop catering to the status quo.

Burgess Everett: What about Chuck Schumer?

Peggy Flanagan: I don’t think Chuck Schumer is particularly invested in me, and I’m uncommitted toward him — it’s mutual ambivalence.

Burgess Everett: Should Democrats fight again if expiring health care subsidies aren’t extended?

Peggy Flanagan: Many felt Democrats stepped back too soon in the past. If ACA protections and subsidies are at risk, I hope Democrats are prepared to stand and fight to rebuild trust with voters.

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.