TARGET: OBJECTIVE: HORIZON:
⚡ MISSION OVERVIEW — ALL VIABLE CANDIDATES (April 2026)

Live dashboard of all viable and watching-tier candidates. Click any card to jump directly to that candidate's pre-computed intervention sequence and tactical brief. Probability figures are Ferguson-composite projections based on current invisible-primary signals, not measured polling. The 92% donor-persistence figure is sourced: Battaglini, Leone Sciabolazza, Lin & Patacchini (2024), Unobserved Contributions and Political Influence: Evidence from the Death of Top Donors, NBER Working Paper 32649 (see EFFECT_SIZES.md Table 0).

🎯 Methodology — Mission Overview LIVE when backend reachable, ANALYST in snapshot mode as of …
Nomination probabilities (28.4%, 26.1%, etc.) come from /api/v1/invisible-primary/ferguson/scores. Important caveat (Phase 8.2.3 Pod 3 audit, 2026-05-17): the backend route in backend/src/invisible_primary/ferguson_routes.py currently returns hardcoded literals (e.g. "nom_probability": 28.4 at line 102) — it is not yet computing the Ferguson composite live. The values are therefore ANALYST regardless of LIVE/SNAPSHOT mode, until Phase 9 wires the InfluenceRanker composite into the route. In offline/snapshot mode, the same values are served from the inline fallback dataset frozen 2026-04-12. The “#1 priority action” per candidate is editorial selection from EFFECT_SIZES.md Grade-A historical effect sizes (Obama 2007 Hollywood cascade; Biden 2020 SC-Clyburn cascade; UAW home-state 2008 effect). The “+X–Ypts” impact ranges are analogues from those historical cascades, not 2028-specific forecasts. Source: backend/src/invisible_primary/ferguson_routes.py::scores. Roadmap: live banner indicator (Sprint 7.4 pattern) being added in Phase 8.
VIABLE
Pete Buttigieg
28.4% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: Secure Reid Hoffman as tech anchor donor (+6-10pts)
VIABLE
Kamala Harris
26.1% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: Katzenberg first signal donor commit resets narrative (+8-12pts)
WATCHING
Gavin Newsom
18.2% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: Midwest donor outreach for economic credibility (+5-8pts)
WATCHING
Gretchen Whitmer
13.7% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: UAW early endorsement locks MI labor credibility (+8-12pts)
WATCHING
Josh Shapiro
8.9% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: PA donor network activation + electability framing (+6-10pts)
WATCHING
JB Pritzker
4.7% nom. prob ANALYST
🎯 #1: Signal external donor commitments to counter self-fund narrative (+4-7pts)
🗺 Optimal Intervention Sequences
Pre-generated for all viable candidates | Instant load
PRE-LOADED ✓
🗺 Methodology — Optimal Intervention Sequences ANALYST as of …
These sequences are editorial, written by Catalyst analysts and anchored on the Grade-A effect-size table in EFFECT_SIZES.md. The page description previously said “derived from Dijkstra shortest-path analysis on the 68-actor causal influence graph” — that is the backend route at /api/v1/invisible-primary/ops/compute-path, which overrides the editorial sequences when reachable. In offline mode, the editorial sequences are shown. The “+X–Ypts” impact ranges per step cite the historical cascade that anchors them (e.g. Biden 2020 SC-Clyburn = +35–40pt, Obama 2007 Hollywood = +8–12pt Q1 fundraising). These are analogues, not 2028-specific forecasts.
docs/EFFECT_SIZES.md as of … docs/CAUSAL_GRAPH.json as of …
Sources: docs/EFFECT_SIZES.md Tables 0–6, docs/CAUSAL_GRAPH.json. Replaceable with live Dijkstra solver output when backend operational.
BUTTIGIEG
HARRIS
NEWSOM
WHITMER
SHAPIRO
PRITZKER
⚙ CUSTOM
📋 Active Operations Board
Drag cards between columns | Click to expand
loading...
Planning
In Progress
Executed
Measuring
🕸 Network Path Visualizer
Click node to see access strategy | Toggle Grade A paths
loading...
● Accessible (direct) ● 2 hops ● Needs intermediary ● Difficult access
📡 Cascade Probability Monitor
2028 Dem nomination probabilities | Signal-adjusted
loading...
📻 Intelligence Feed
Live signals — add new intelligence below
0 signals
📻 Methodology — Intelligence Feed LIVE when backend reachable, ANALYST in snapshot mode as of …
Signals are real news events (e.g. David Axelrod HKS appearance Apr 12 2026; NAN Convention 35th Annual Apr 8–11 2026; Politico Apr 8 2026 “invisible primary went from invisible to visible”) sourced from public coverage. The “+X% Buttigieg / +Y% Harris nomination probability” impact estimates next to each signal are ANALYST — editorial projections from the Ferguson composite model anchored on EFFECT_SIZES.md Grade-A historical cascades, NOT measured polling shifts. In LIVE mode, signals come from /api/v1/invisible-primary/ops/intelligence-feed; in snapshot mode (shown here), three editorial signals are pinned to the 2026-04-12 baseline. 2026-05-17 Phase 8.2.2 Pod 3: methodology card surfaced inline (was buried in the data-integrity footer, violating E3 — cards must live next to the numbers they explain). Source: backend/src/invisible_primary/ops_routes.py::intelligence_feed · effect-size anchors: EFFECT_SIZES.md Tables 0–6 (Battaglini et al. 2024, NBER WP 32649; Cohen-Karol-Noel-Zaller 2008).
🧠 Tactical Intelligence Briefs — All Viable Candidates
Pre-generated by Catalyst Intelligence Engine | Ferguson Model v2.1 | CONFIDENTIAL | April 12, 2026
BUTTIGIEG
HARRIS
NEWSOM
WHITMER
SHAPIRO
PRITZKER
💰 Total Race Funding — FEC + Dark Money
Combined disclosed (FEC) and undisclosed (dark) money per race | 2024 Cycle
$4.7B TOTAL
~$4.7B
Total Combined Funding SOURCED
OpenSecrets 2024 cycle aggregate
~$2.8B
FEC Disclosed SOURCED
FEC bulk download Q4 2024
~$1.9B
Dark Money SOURCED
OpenSecrets dark-money summary 2024
MT-Senate
Most Saturated Race SOURCED
~$289M total (OpenSecrets)
💰 Methodology — Total Race Funding SOURCED as of …
Top-line aggregates from OpenSecrets 2024 cycle summary (~$15.9B all federal — here filtered to competitive Senate + Presidential), FEC bulk download Q4 2024, and OpenSecrets dark-money summary 2024. MT-Senate per-race total sourced from OpenSecrets MT 2024 race page. Per-race rows in the table below load live from the dark-money tracker API (/api/v1/dark-money/funding-by-race). All cited URLs verified clickable 2026-05-17.
40% dark, 62% competitive: Dark money is 40% of total race funding but accounts for 62% of spending in the most competitive races.
Montana — 67% dark: Montana's Senate race had the highest dark money ratio in 2024 — 67% of all funding came from undisclosed sources.
R concentrates, D spreads: Republican dark money concentrates on fewer races; Democratic dark money spreads wider across more districts.
RaceStateFEC (R)Dark (R)Total R FEC (D)Dark (D)Total DGrand TotalDark %R/D Balance
🕸 Campaign Manager Network Map
Force-directed graph of operatives → races | Node size = funds directed | Edge weight = spending influence
40 OPERATIVES
Honest gap (2026-05-17 audit): Operative-to-funds-directed dollar totals (LaCivita $1.42B, Dan Sena 32 races, etc.) are not publicly verifiable at this level of attribution. Public sources (FEC SI-2, OpenSecrets PAC pages) name treasurers and consultants but do not aggregate spending by individual operative. Names + firm affiliations below are SOURCED; the “funds directed” / win-rate columns are ANALYST estimates from 2024-cycle FEC aggregates + cited press totals, pending AdImpact / Path-to-Win subscription ingestion (DEV_PLAN Phase 8.2).
40
Operatives Tracked SOURCED
~7
Avg Races / Top Op ANALYST
Dan Sena
Most Connected (DCCC strategy) SOURCED
LaCivita
Trump Campaign / MAGA Inc. SOURCED
Operative Detail — Click headers to sort
OPERATIVE ↕ FIRM ↕ PARTY ↕ RACES ↕ TOTAL FUNDS ↕ WIN RATE ↕ TOP 3 RACES
🛡 Donor Succession Planning
Concentration risk & replaceability per candidate · grounded in Battaglini et al. (2024, NBER WP 32649)
A-GRADE EVIDENCE
2
🔴 CRITICAL
2
🟠 ELEVATED
1
🟡 MODERATE
1
🟢 RESILIENT
⚠ NETWORK CHOKE POINTS
📋 SUCCESSION-RISK WATCHLIST
CANDIDATE ↕ TOP DONOR ↕ CONCENTRATION ↕ REPLACEABILITY ↕ PROJECTED Δ WIN PROB ↕ RISK TIER ↕ RECOMMENDATION
Methodology: as of … — Risk tier and projected Δ win probability derived from Battaglini, Leone Sciabolazza, Lin & Patacchini (2024), "Unobserved Contributions and Political Influence: Evidence from the Death of Top Donors," NBER Working Paper 32649 (July 2024). Baseline donor-death effect: −2.8pp candidate election probability (Table 2, n=278 deaths, 887 affected candidates, 2008–2018 cycles); 10× larger in close races (margin <5%); 4× larger for prominent ("Superstar") donors. Replaceability baseline 19.4% within 1 cycle. Persistence: 92% of candidates have ≥1 donor funding ≥75% of prior campaigns. Research bundle.