Mike Flood won. Get what Mike Flood says in office by email, analyzed for rhetorical techniques, once sworn in. And an email if the result changes: a recount or a call reversed. One-click unsubscribe.
Confirming also makes your free Semblen account, with a 14-day Pro trial. No card.
Chris Backemeyer (Democrat) and Mike Flood (Republican) are the nominees for Nebraska's 1st congressional district in the November 3, 2026 general election. Mike Flood is the incumbent. By their latest FEC reports, Chris Backemeyer's campaign had raised $1.2 million (through October 14, 2026) and Mike Flood's campaign $2.8 million (through October 14, 2026). Outside groups have reported $651,000 for Chris Backemeyer and $257,000 against; $51,000 for Mike Flood and $2.7 million against.
Chris Backemeyer (DEM), Mike Flood (REP, incumbent).
2 others filed with the FEC; any ads they ran are below. 0 ads analyzed, 0 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing.
Also on every Nebraska ballot: 4 statewide ballot measures →The ballot wording and the official arguments, read for rhetorical techniques.
How to vote in Nebraska
From Nebraska's official election office. Each line links to the official page it came from.
Registration
Register by Fri, Oct 16 (Online by midnight, by mail postmarked, or at the DMV, all by Oct 16 (3rd Friday before). In person at the county election office by 6 pm Oct 23 (2nd Friday before).) (passed)Source: sos.nebraska.gov ↗
Early voting in person
Mon, Oct 5 to Mon, Nov 2 (At the county clerk or election commissioner office, not more than 30 days before the election) (passed)Source: sos.nebraska.gov ↗
By mail
Anyone can vote by mail; request a ballot by Fri, Oct 23 (Must be received by 6 pm on the 2nd Friday before the election); return it by Tue, Nov 3 (Must arrive by close of polls: 8 pm Central or 7 pm Mountain) (passed)Source: sos.nebraska.gov ↗Source: sos.nebraska.gov ↗
Checked October 6, 2026. Rules can change; confirm with the official site before you go.
Something wrong or out of date? Tell us
A person reads every report and fixes errors the same day.
Got a political text?
Paste a campaign text message you’ve received. Semblen marks the persuasion techniques in its wording and lists the factual claims it makes. Take your name out first: what you paste is analyzed and kept like any text.
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
From FEC filings for 2025–26. Outside spending is money a group spends on its own about a candidate — TV and online ads, mail, canvassing. It is not a donation to the campaign, and the candidate does not control it. Supporting means it was spent to help that candidate win; Opposing means it was spent to defeat them, usually on attack ads. Groups report it within 24 or 48 hours as the election nears. Raised is the campaign's own fundraising, as of its latest quarterly report. Largest donors come from each outside spender's own FEC receipts, with each donor's share of its itemized receipts; donors under $100,000 are not named. People are shown with the employer and occupation they reported. A donor that is itself a political committee is shown with its own largest donors. Companies and nonprofits don't report their funders to the FEC, so the trail ends there, and the page says so.
Chris Backemeyer (DEM)
Raised
$1.2M through 2026-10-14individuals $972K · PACs $77K · candidate's own money, incl. loans $105K · cash on hand $355K
RETIRE CAREER POLITICIANS— $650K supporting BackemeyerLargest donors:
WAY BACK PAC $200K (77%) (its largest donors: WESTERN FUTURES FUND $1.2M, an organization; TOOLBOX $650K, an organization; NORTH FUND $300K, an organization)BIG RED LEADERSHIP PAC— $257K opposing BackemeyerWORKING AMERICA— $1,380 supporting BackemeyerSIERRA CLUB INDEPENDENT ACTION— $10 supporting Backemeyer
Bundled through PACs
none reported · FEC bulk data of 2026-11-01
7 PACs gave directly — alphabetical; the legal limit is $5,000 per election
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVT. EMPL. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE $7,500
HMP— $1.4M opposing FloodLargest donors:
HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD $93.7M (39%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); Reid G Hoffman $8.5M (4%), Greylock Partners, Partner; ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FUND $5.0M (2%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); Fred Eychaner $5.0M (2%), Retired; UNITED ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ISSUES FUND $4.8M (2%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC)RETIRE CAREER POLITICIANS— $1.3M opposing FloodLargest donors:
WAY BACK PAC $200K (77%) (its largest donors: WESTERN FUTURES FUND $1.2M, an organization; TOOLBOX $650K, an organization; NORTH FUND $300K, an organization)AMERICAN LIBERTY FOUNDATION— $51K supporting FloodLargest donors:
AMERICAN LIBERTY ACTION FUND $355K (26%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); VOICE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL $250K (18%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); THE GEO GROUP, INC. PAC $250K (18%); THE 2026 VICTORY COMMITTEE $148K (11%) (its largest donors: ANDREWS, GEORGE $409K); Phillip Frost $100K (7%), Opko Health INC, CEOWORKING AMERICA— $1,146 opposing Flood
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it comes from a national Senate group and ran mostly in NE; or it ran mostly in NE and names a candidate — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific rhetorical move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. Running a check and seeing its verdicts are part of Semblen Pro, because each check costs money to run; anyone can see which claims an ad makes. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.