Mpls25: An Election Guide for the Perplexed

Minneapolis is a DFL town. In elections for statewide partisan offices, Minneapolis typically gives DFL-nominated candidates more than 80% of its votes. The DFL does not nominate candidates for municipal non-partisan races, but in Minneapolis, it does consider “endorsing” for them. Despite major differences in nominating and endorsing procedures, most Minneapolis voters respond to “DFL-endorsed” as if it means “DFL-nominated”. They reliably vote for “DFL-endorsed” candidates, who thus reliably win.

Earlier this year, we showed that by determined, small-scale organizing for DFL caucuses and conventions, Far Left candidates seized control of Minneapolis by seizing DFL endorsements for Minneapolis seats. We argued that these candidates have been assisted by nationally-funded local organizations, which keep members continuously engaged, then activate them in election years to procure DFL endorsement for the organizations’ preferred candidates.

This article expands on these themes. We contend that recently, battles for DFL endorsement in Minneapolis are fought less among individual candidates, and more between two political parties, each with their own sets of organizational support, each with their own slates of candidates.

Minnesota law defines ‘political party’ quite stringently.  We use the term more generically.  AI defines it as: “An organized group of people who come together to acquire and exercise political power by running candidates for office… Party members hold similar ideas and ascribe to similar ideologies and policy goals.”

Alliance with a “Political Party” is like belonging to a tribe: Mine is good, the other is bad. Voters can pause their brains, as the party tells them which candidates to support and oppose, and the party familiarizes voters with candidate names.

Although there now are two parties competing in Minneapolis, with quite different platforms and governing philosophies, Minneapolis still is a DFL town, so most candidates assert they are “DFL”.  Consequently, the “DFL” label has no meaning. It does not help voters differentiate among candidates; it confuses voters by conflating candidates.

We attempt to quell the confusion. Using candidate campaign behavior, and office holder voting behavior, we show which candidates competing in Mpls25 belong to which party, so that voters know which candidates are best aligned with their views.

A deeper dive:  Why “DFL-endorsement” means nothing this year

For at least a decade, a factional battle has been brewing within the DFL, mostly in Minneapolis, but spreading across the state. This year the public got a ringside seat, through the fraught Minneapolis DFL convention on July 19. As news broke that the Minneapolis DFL had endorsed Omar Fateh for Mayor, along with a slate of Park Board candidates, news also broke, almost immediately, that more than 100 people had filed challenges with the Minnesota DFL about how the convention was run. Challengers alleged that the Minneapolis DFL had manipulated who was allowed to vote, that they had not counted votes, that they had unduly eliminated a candidate from the ballot, and more.

Following standard procedure, the DFL Constitution, Bylaws and Rules Committee (CBRC), comprised of members elected every two years from DFL units across the state, formally heard the challenges, giving each side equal time to present their arguments. The hearing, open to the public on Zoom, was on August 17. A few days later, the CBRC rescinded Fateh’s endorsement, citing the convention’s procedural flaws.

The CBRC did not rescind “DFL endorsement” for the Park Board candidates, although they were granted at the same flawed convention. This contributed to Fateh supporters’ conviction that “Party Insiders” were out to get Fateh on Frey’s behalf. The Minneapolis DFL appealed the CBRC decision, but on September 29, the DFL State Executive Committee (SEC) upheld it by a 40-7 vote.  The SEC also voted to create a committee to monitor Minneapolis DFL behavior, to ensure it followed DFL rules.

What are the two sides?

How shall we name the two parties when both claim “DFL”?   While some readers may object, I shall use the terms “Far-Left DSA” and “Traditional Liberal” to differentiate.

The Far-Left DSA Party is supported by the national Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), through its Twin Cities chapter . It also is supported by “Minneapolis for the Many”, a local franchise of a dark-money Massachusetts-based PAC which sponsors similar groups across the US.

The Traditional Liberal Party is supported by All of Minneapolis, a Minnesota PAC which receives contributions from Minneapolis residents and business owners, some of whom are suburban residents. It also is newly supported by the DC-based Center for New Liberalism, through its Twin Cities chapter.

Both parties’ candidates claim the “DFL” brand.  Consider:

• Six candidates filed for the Ward 5 City Council seat, which is being vacated by Jeremiah Ellison. Since January 2024, Ellison voted more than 85% of the time with his DSA-endorsed Council colleagues. He endorsed Ethrophic Burnett to succeed him; she also is endorsed by MplsMany and (DSA-endorsed) Aisha Chughtai.  Burnett campaigns with Omar Fateh, Jason Chavez, Soren Stevenson, and Michael Wilson, all DSA-endorsed. Yet when she filed her candidacy, she listed herself as “DFL”.  But so did all the other Ward 5 candidates, including Pearll Warren, endorsed by Traditional Liberal AllOfMpls.
• Four city council candidates sought and received DSA endorsement this year (Wonsley W2, Stevenson W8, Chavez W9, Chughtai W10). In their filings, only Wonsley self-identified as DSA; all others self-identified as DFL. Most of their AllOfMpls opponents also identify as DFL, including Madore W2, Bassais W8, Millard W10. Orban W9 identifies as “Independent”.
• The TCDSA prominently touts its endorsement of Omar Fateh for Mayor, but in his filing, Fateh elides his DSA endorsement and self-identifies as “DFL.”
• The “DFL-endorsed” Park Board candidates carry that moniker because in the final 30 minutes of the fraught 13-hour July 19 convention, only Fateh supporters remained as the clock ticked down. As Will Stancil said, “Arguably the park board candidates got the worst of it”, meaning that at the end of the “train wreck” (his words), with only Fateh supporters hanging on, Park Board candidates not aligned with DSA-Fateh had no chance.

Let behavior be the guide

What is the busy, distracted voter to do? How can the ordinary voter know which candidates are in which political party when almost all proclaim they are “DFL”?

Behavior.  Watch how candidates associate as a group, who campaigns together, who endorses whom.

Figure 1 shows links between 46 candidates, the three Council members not seeking re-election, and the four organizations cited above. In network terminology, each is a “node”.  Two nodes are linked if at least one endorsed the other, or if they campaigned together (data and methods here). Line thickness reflects association strength.  Formal endorsement is stronger than a shared campaign activity, but multiple shared campaign activities are stronger than just one.

There are two distinct clusters of candidates and supporters in Figure 1. The lower left cluster contains Far Left candidates and supporters; the upper right cluster contains Traditional Liberal candidates and supporters.

The 46 candidates in Figure 1 are listed in Figure 2, with another 36 candidates not in Figure 1, because they are not linked to anyone else. From their websites, and input to this author, of those 36, one is believed to be Far Left, while nine are believed to be Traditional Liberal.  Party affiliations of the other 26 are unknown.

Some observations from Figures 1 and 2:

• If our assessments about the unlinked candidates are correct, the two parties have equal numbers of candidates contesting the 25 Minneapolis offices to be filled this year. The Far-Left DSA has 27 candidates, of whom 96% share endorsements and/or campaign events. The Traditional Liberal Party has 26 candidates, of whom 65% share endorsements and/or campaign events. In Figure 1, the lower left cluster (Far Left) is larger than the upper right (Traditional Liberal) because more Far Left than Traditional Liberal candidates are linked.
• DSA-endorsed Omar Fateh is at the center of the lower left cluster; 18 candidates and/or departing Council Members (CMs) have endorsed and/or campaigned with him. There is no individual at the center of the upper right cluster. Only 6 Traditional Liberal candidates share endorsements and/or campaign activities with Mayor Frey, despite his high-profile endorsements from Governor Walz and Senator Klobuchar. (This paragraph previously, erroneously included Ilhan Omar as endorsing Frey)

Why it matters

The purpose of a political party is to gain government control. The victorious party in Mpls25 will set the city’s trajectory for the next four years, and very likely beyond, as the next four years could have cascading and compounding impacts, not easily reversed.

To illustrate, we review some votes of the current Minneapolis City Council, where since January 2024, the Far-Left DSA Party has outnumbered Traditional Liberal Party by 9-4.

• In October 2024, CM Wonsley authored a resolution that would have levied a “carbon tax” on the 36 biggest emitters in the city, saying it would be “one of the most meaningful steps we can take to combat climate change.” But state law allows cities to charge regulatory fees only to recoup costs. In the City Attorney’s legal opinion, Wonsley’s resolution violated state law. Undeterred, all Far- Left DSA CMs voted for Wonsley’s resolution, while all Traditional Liberal CMs voted against. Had Frey not vetoed the resolution, or had Wonsley not been absent for the override vote, the Far-Left DSA would have set the city on a legal collision course with the state.
• The parties clashed over the 2025 budget in December 2024, when Far-Left DSA CMs inserted more than 70 amendments into the budget that Mayor Frey had proposed. These amendments funded what the Mayor called “new, unvetted, ward-specific projects”. They included a Latino Center for Community Engagement, the Lake Street small business hub Mercado Central, the One Southside Clinic, and the Urban Farm Community Program. All Far-Left DSA CMs voted to fund these projects, and all Traditional Liberal CMs voted against.
• The Mayor vetoed the Far-Left DSA budget, saying that it would obligate residents and businesses fund these pet projects for years. The Far-Left DSA CMs overrode his veto. Frey responded: “This budget is completely irresponsible. It adds millions in unnecessary spending and slashes critical needs, including encampment response, police recruitment, and basic city services [like street repair] – all while putting our City on an unsustainable financial path.” Council President Elliot Payne called Frey’s veto “absurd”.  Aurin Chowdhury: “It’s not a pet project to say, ‘We need to continue senior transportation and ensure that 800-plus rides, that some of our most vulnerable residents rely on’”.
• Far-Left DSA CMs have taken several votes (like this) about the 38^th & Chicago intersection, where in late May 2020, George Floyd lost his life beneath Derek Chauvin’s knee. Jason Chavez and Robin Wonsley want a pedestrian mall at the site, but local businesses, mostly minority-owned, along with local residents, beg the city to reopen the intersection to normal traffic, allowing its closure only for special events. Traditional Liberal CMs vote with the local businesses and residents, but because they are outnumbered, the site’s future remains unresolved, more than five years after the traumatic event.

Figure 3 shows all pairwise CM voting relationships, from January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.  (Credit to Josh Martin for compiling these data and graciously publishing them).

The three DSA-endorsed CMs (Wonsley, Chavez, Chughtai) voted together 95-96% of the time.  Their allies joined them 80-93% of the time. Traditional Liberal CMs also vote with each other, but at lower rates, 60-80%, and there is only one CM, Emily Koski (W11) who connects the two parties.

Koski voted 60% of the time with Andrea Jenkins and Michael Rainville, which indirectly connected her to the two other Traditional Liberal CMs.  But most of the time she voted with the Far-Left DSA.  She voted with Chavez, Wonsley and Chughtai 69% of the time, and with their allies 75-83% of the time.

Koski was first elected in 2021, by defeating (58% to 30%) defund-police incumbent Jeremy Shroeder. She easily won re-election in 2023, after a first term in which she fulfilled the expectations of her W11 voters and supporters. Yet upon taking her second term, she began voting more frequently with the Far-Left DSA. This shocked her supporters, who speculated (sometimes unkindly) that in her bid to become Mayor, she was abandoning her ward and her principles to curry favor with the Far-Left DSA.

Koski’s mayoral campaign officially lasted only 4.5 months. She suspended it in April 2025 saying “Under the political climate, I can’t be my authentic self and be a candidate in this race the way it demands.” Perhaps, by voting with DSA-endorsed CMs only 69% of the time, and by voting with their allies no more than 83% of the time, they did not trust her sincerity, much less her fealty.

Koski has since endorsed Far-Left DSA CMs Aisha Chughtai and Aurin Chowdhury for their Mpls25 re-election bids. She endorsed Jazz Hampton for Mayor, thereby joining the Hampton-Davis-Fateh team which is using ranked choice voting to promote Fateh over Frey. Koski has not endorsed Fateh, but she has campaigned with him. Koski exits public office from the lower left, although she entered from the upper right. Perhaps this explains her “authentic self” remark.

Conclusion

As Minneapolis voters become increasingly aware of the schism within the DFL, they nervously acknowledge that “DFL” tells them nothing this year. But few have time to independently investigate all candidates. In my precinct, for example, the ballot will list 33 candidates, contesting 8 seats.  It is overwhelming. Competing claims over who is “DFL” makes it more so, not less.

This article is intended to relieve voters’ burden by filling the knowledge gap. Using candidate campaign behavior (Figure 1), and CM voting behavior (Figure 3), we portray the two political parties competing to control Minneapolis, where Figure 2 lists their candidates. We offer this as a Guide to the Perplexed.