Mike Lindell, the “MyPillow Guy,” seems to be the front-runner to become Minnesota Republicans’ nominee for Governor in the 2022 election. This seems like a big joke to many, but we need to take it very seriously.
Lindell has many advantages that other GOP gubernatorial candidates lack — minor celebrity, statewide name recognition, tons of personal money, a compelling personal story of redemption, the wink and a nod endorsement of Minnesota GOP Chair Jennifer Carnahan, and most importantly, a likely Trump endorsement.
In a GOP primary, where the most slavishly Trumpy Trumpists rise to the top, Lindell can point out that he not only supports Trump, he practically deifies him. Take his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC):
“As I stand before you today, I see the greatest president in history. Of course he is. He was chosen by God. God answered our prayers, our millions of prayers, and gave us grace, and a miracle happened on Nov. 8, 2016. We were given a second chance and time granted to get our country back on track with our conservative values and getting people saved in Jesus’s name.”
Top that, Paul Gazelka, Pete Stauber, Scott Jensen, Chad Greenway, and Matt Birk.
To any swing voters paying close attention, it’s obvious that electing Lindell governor would be a disaster. But are they paying attention? I don’t want to take it for granted that Minnesotans won’t elect a narcissistic minor celebrity. See Jesse Ventura in 1998 and Donald Trump in 2016.
So here are five important reasons to work like hell to keep Lindell out of power.
Crooked Businessman. The MyPillow company Lindell founded has earned a humiliating “F” grade from the Better Business Bureau due to the number of consumer complaints it has received.
He also was forced to pay a $1 million lawsuit settle for making false medical claims about his pillows. It turns out that pillows cannot cure insomnia, sleep apnea and fibromyalgia.
Over his career, Lindell has shown himself to be a rich, fast-talking, serial-lying, TV-empowered con man running a shady business. Sound familiar?
Admitted Stalker. Mike Lindell has been divorced twice, and violated a restraining order obtained by a girlfriend who accused him of physically abusing her. This is how Jim Heath TV describes those events:
Lindell was divorced for the first time by 2008, and was arrested in January of that year on suspicion of domestic assault.
The woman he was dating claimed he had punched and kicked her — even hitting her with “a four-foot wooden dowel,” according to documents.
Lindell denied the allegations, but an order of protection was still issued in the case.
He was arrested two months later for violating the order by allegedly taking the woman’s car.
He ultimately pleaded guilty to the order of protection violation.
Keep in mind the old adage: “Character is who you are when no one is looking.”
Dangerous Quack. You know those guys who crawl out from under rocks to con desperate people whose families are in crisis? Yeah, he’s that guy.
At a time when Americans were desperate for good science-based advice about how to survive the deadly Covid-19 pandemic, Lindell publicly promoted the plant extract oleandrin as “the miracle of all time.”
Meanwhile, scientists stress that there is no scientific evidence supporting these claims, and that oleandrin is poisonous even at very low doses.
Oh and by the way, Lindell just happens to have a financial and governing stake in a company that makes oleandrin, Phoenix Biotechnology.
This chapter tells us a lot about how Lindell would be as a governor. His instincts are to ignore science and put profits over people.
Murderer Protector. Lindell shamelessly donated bail money to spring accused murderer Kyle Rittenhouse from jail. Kenosha, Wisconsin law enforcement officials have charged the young white male of the murder of two Wisconsinites who were peacefully calling for an end to police brutality.
Lindell later claimed he didn’t intend his donation to help Rittenhouse with bail, but he refused to seek the return of his donation. As with Trump, pay attention to what Lindell does, not what he says.
Keep in mind, Lindell didn’t come to the defense of George Floyd, or the police officers who were bloodied and killed at the U.S. Capitol by pro-Trump insurrectionists. But he rushed to the defense of someone murdering peaceful Americans who were speaking out for justice for black people. That speaks volumes.
Inciter of Insurrection. After more than 70-days of bipartisan local, state and federal officials confirming 2020 presidential election results through legally sanctioned counts, audits, recounts, re-recounts, certifications, and court reviews, Lindell continues to publicly pedal the baseless, dangerous lie that Biden’s 7 million vote, 74 elector margin is somehow invalid. For good measure, he also claimed Senator Tina Smith’s 5-point victory over Jason Lewis was actually a loss.
With no supporting evidence, and several court decisions tossing out the allegations, Lidell continues to falsely allege that voting machine companies Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems had conspired with foreign powers to rig voting machines to steal the election from Trump. As a result, Twitter has permanently banned Lindell and his company MyPillow, because they have seen that he is unable or unwilling to tell the truth, and is inciting violent attacks against democracy.
Speaking of inciting violence, Lindell attended Trump’s infamous insurrection-inciting rally, which led to Trump’s second impeachment. After supporting the incitement, Lindell aggressively pushed false claims that the murder and mayhem at the Capitol was done by Antifa members, instead of by Trump-supporting white supremacists and militia members.
Weeks later, none of the arrested insurrectionists have been found to be associated with Antifa, or any other left-wing group.
As Lindell’s infomercials say, “but wait, there’s more!”
Lindell was photographed entering a White House meeting with a list of talking points that included encouraging President Trump to impose martial law to help Trump overturn the will of the people in the 2020 presidential election. Martial law!
So while we’re yucking it up at the cute SNL skit, remember that this guy isn’t just a harmless kitschy-cute infomercial huckster. He’s a consumer-victimizing, protection order-violating, science-denying, serial-lying, insurrection-inciting, and martial law-advocating crackpot.
It’s good that you (and I’m guessing others as well) are compiling information about this man and the threat he poses. Thank you for that.
It’s sad and frightening that we must constantly play defense against serious challenges to sane political dynamics. How I long for the days when I considered George W. my nemesis. Now I think of him with an almost fond sense of nostalgia. The former bad guys have become the good guys (i.e. Liz Cheney). I am afraid that the current bad guys could be followed by worse guys. Then what?
It’s really difficult to know at this point what “the bottom” could be. I mean, if insurrectionist inciters and assination endorsers aren’t rejected, who will be?
Do you think you’ve hit bottom?
Do you think you’ve hit bottom?
Oh, no.
There’s a bottom below.
–Malvina Reynolds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boyiqeyFwQ8
There’s a Bottom Below
Malvina Reynolds
Provided to YouTube by Smithsonian Folkways Recordings
Ha! Thanks for that.
Honestly, I think it would be great if Lindell was the GOP nomination. “Moderate” Republicans actually do more harm to the world than crazy Republicans. Remember that none of them objected to any of trumps awful, awful policies. And that all Republicans have been party to the “global warming is a hoax”language. And secondly, who is less likely to actually win the election? A “moderate” who most Republicans and even foolish independents can be proud of? Or a Crazy? I think many of us should join the Republican party during the primary and vote for Lindell.
Lindell could be easier to beat than some of the others, but you never know. He could generate big GOP base turnout in an off-year election that could sweep a lot of down ballot elections. After living through Trump in 2016 and Ventura in 1998, I don’t trust Minnesota voters.
Responding to the previous comment, yes, Lynn Cheney is a terrible person. She’s not as crazy as the rest of the Republicans but she would do more damage to the world than any of us can fathom. Her father was the architect of the worst policy ithis country has ever seen: Taking us to war over fake yellow cake just being one example. The more the crazies take over the Republican party, the closer the Republican Party comes to completely dying. Things don’t live forever. That party is more than 150 years old. And it has had cancer for 50 years. It’s time for the republican party to die. Let the crazies take over.
I’m fine with the Republican Party dying, but it doesn’t appear that they’re dying electorally at this stage. Remember, this party, while engaged in full-throated lunacy and lying, came pretty darn close in the 2020 presidential election…in a year when they had so dramatically botched the response to the worst pandemic in a century and the worst economy since the Great Depression. Their lunacy is losing them depressingly few votes so far.
Joe, I fully agree.
Thank you, Joe, for shining more light on this dark man. I did not realize his history was THIS shady!
That’s the danger of celebrity candidates. People think they know them from what they have seen on TV. But that’s obviously not the whole picture when it comes to people like Trump and Lindell.
Here’s the thing–it’s about the celebrity. Trump had years of TV exposure, so that all sorts of people thought that they knew him. Thus, when the Access Hollywood tapes came out, they felt that that was not the Trump that they knew. Because they “knew” him already (from The Apprentice), it was easy for them to discount all the conflicting information they got from the media (especially all the stories that documented how sketchy his businesses and business practices were). I do not think that is the case with the My Pillow guy…but his minor celebrity might be enough for him to capture the GOP nomination.
I read an interesting article a while back, that said that the GOP had essentially made a bad trade with Trump–they traded the highly educated suburban voters (who were becoming more racially and ethnically and gender diverse) for the less educated white male exurban voters. This worked for Trump, because he could get them out to vote due to his celebrity, but they are far less reliable voters than the more highly educated suburban voters. Can anyone other than Trump get them out to vote consistently? That is the key question going forward.
Both very good points.
I think the part of Lindell’s celebrity that will help him is the “self-made man” image that infomercials and the Lindell Story coverage have created. Republicans get mighty aroused by “self-made man” legends.
The other part of the “bad trade” is alienating the fastest growing demographics (people of color) and young people in order to win over older slower growing demographics. That also is a short-sighted long-term electoral strategy.
However, I must say I’m getting nervous about Democrats inability to do better with Hispanics, even against an a-hole immigrant basher. It seems Hispanic immigrants’ ancestors might not be inclined to fight for immigrants coming in behind them any more than European immigrants’ ancestors do. Also many Hispanics might be more socially conservative than much of the rest of the Democratic base. If the Republicans were sane, they would be dropping the ugly racist edges of their immigrant bashing to try to cultivate that fast growing demographic with their abortion appeals, etc.
But if they do that, will they still be able to generate turnout among casual voters by promoting white resentment among non-college whites? Delicate balance for them.
The Hispanic thing is an issue for both sides. First of all, (to state what should be obvious) Hispanics are not homogenous, and many don’t appreciate being lumped together with those other “Hispanics”. Second, many Hispanics aspire to becoming “white” (they want to fully integrate and become wealthy, like Mike Lindell and Trump) (Irish immigrants did this, over time). Many do not appreciate being lumped in with “non-whites” (and quite a few come from cultures where skin color hierarchies exist). Third, as you point out, many are socially conservative.
You are right to point out that Democrats could easily lose large parts of this demographic. Luckily for them, Trump and many of his immigrant bashing friends have been blind to this opportunity so far.
One of the reasons Democrats don’t do better with Hispanics is that they don’t understand them, or at least the super liberal White Dems don’t. Here is one example:
White liberals think that almost all Hispanics support open borders. Well, not all of us do, and one reason for that is the fact that opening the borders to low-skilled workers drives down wages for workers who are already here — many of whom are Hispanic and/or POC. It also drives up unemployment for the same people and strains social services that many in the immigrant community rely on. All of this has been documented in studies, but people who don’t have the privilege of reading studies have actually experienced it first hand, to their detriment.
Also, for every legal immigrant into the U.S. from Latin America or the Caribbean there are at least a few family members back home waiting to get their green cards. None of these people like it when others are jumping to the front of the line, and they certainly don’t like people who are encouraging the line-jumping.
Another point: White liberals think they are being helpful by making up terms like “Latinx.” But this is simply a case of linguistic hegemony brought to us courtesy of the Academy. The message coded within that term is “your language is sexist, but don’t worry, we’ll help you make presentable.” This is entirely disrespectful, and it’s really not cool to mess with someone else’s language.
There is a lot of stereotyping going on in the liberal community– particularly in woke academia–which does not facilitate peace, love, and understanding between the stereotypers and their would-be protegees. I know liberals mean well and want to make the world a better place, and I respect that impulse. But a lot of their “solutions” seem more like virtue signalling and are not grounded in experience with the actual people they think they want to help.
Ha! I just saw a Pew poll that found only 3% of Hispanics use “Latinx.” So it’s definitely not bubbling up organically! https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in-four-u-s-hispanics-have-heard-of-latinx-but-just-3-use-it/
I’m a white liberal, so obviously have huge gaps in my ability to understand the mindset of that voting block. I know you’re right about the perceived fear among all races and ethnicities that liberals will have wide open borders that will lead to harm to current citizens.
But two thoughts: First, I don’t know any liberal that actually wants an “open border,” with no controls. Biden certainly doesn’t. They just don’t want it clamped shut with no due process for asylum seekers or immigrants. We have always been a nation of immigrants — I certainly wouldn’t be here if we weren’t — and our national soul needs a well-managed influx of new energy. But, absolutely, it needs to be managed. Some clarifications about what Biden supports here: https://apnews.com/article/5c0bfde98f11556abc4339dd18c6f5af
Second, we’re an aging country that needs more young taxpayers to support the retirements of the huge Baby Boom and Gen X generations, and more people willing to fill both skilled and unskilled jobs. Therefore, our economy can’t afford to clamp down the borders and deny due process to asylum seekers and immigrants. Some good supportive research on those points in this article. https://time.com/5594365/america-immigration-future-economic-growth/
So, yes, we shouldn’t have open borders. But neither our national soul nor our economy can take closed borders and reckless immigrant bashing. I suspect we’re in agreement about that, but just wanted to elaborate on my thoughts.
Joe: Yes, we are in agreement about that. And maybe the notion of completely open (that is, functionally non-existent) borders is not a thing with people who were born before the 1980s. It has a bigger following with younger, college-educated people and the farther reaches of the Left.
I think that one reason Trump got as many votes as he did in November is that the rhetoric coming from the Left throughout the summer turned off a lot of people, including many Hispanics. This is supported by interviews with Hispanics in Texas along the border who voted in surprisingly large numbers for Trump. Sorry I can’t find the links right now, but I do remember reading that a lot of Hispanics there work for Border Patrol.
They didn’t like the rhetoric on defunding ICE and getting rid of Border Patrol, and they also don’t like identity politics. A lot of the younger people working in media now have come out of university programs where they’ve been groomed to see the world through the various critical theories (like over at the NY Times). They are presenting liberalism through this lens, and in the process they are turning off a lot of people, especially people who haven’t been to college.
A couple quick closing observations:
1) I don’t know what to do about the “defunding” calls. Biden and congressional leaders immediately denounced that idea, and are pumping gazillions to the police right now through Covid relief bills as Republicans try to block it/defund. But Biden and congressional Demos still got tagged with it in campaign ads. Given that the messaging of the protestors can’t be controlled, I’m not sure what else to do.
2) I wonder if the “woke” college professor thing might be overstated. My kids and their friends are more liberal than I was at their age, but my sense is that it’s not mostly because of “woke” college professors. My sense is it’s more because they grew up in a more diverse world than I did, so they’re more appalled when their friends are mistreated and sincerely want it to change. If you live in a racially homogenous rural area, that doesn’t happen as much, because of your more homogenous friend group, but it does in cities, suburbs, and some towns. I’m not saying liberal professors are irrelevant, just that it seems overstated by right wing commentators and politicians.
Appreciate the thoughtful conversation.