Most of the Emails that I receive (probably 75%) are from people trying to sell me campaign services (texting and phone banking, direct mail, advertising, etc.).
another 20% are special interest groups wanting me to pander for their endorsements.
my campaign is about the less than 5% that are people actually thinking about their vote.
Any editing of emails I receive and post below is for the removal of personal identification of individuals and website formatting issues. I do not censure or validate any of the content.
8/15/2026
Dear Mr. Petersen,
If I can be of assistance please call me. xxx-xxx-xxxx
Sincerely,
E.T.
[enclosure with letter: contribution check]
8/27/2026
To: E. T.
From: Raymond Petersen
Republican Nominee Minnesota Senate District 56
P.O. Box 240262
Apple Valley, MN 55124
Dear Ms. T,
Thank you for your generous contribution offer to my campaign for Minnesota Senate District 56.
Unfortunately, I cannot accept as I have very purposefully set up my campaign as self-funded and am returning your check marked as void. I have no financial accounts or bookkeeping set up to accept donations. I only track and report on what I have personally spent on my campaign.
I believe very strongly (and perhaps naively) in fiscal responsibility as well as leading by example. We have witnessed several years (indeed decades) of irresponsible spending of other people’s money by our political leaders to buy evermore votes. I believe that “money in politics” is the gateway drug to this attitude. I am amazed that campaigns that raise thousands and sometimes millions of dollars still call themselves “grassroots” campaigns. To me “grassroots” means people spreading the word of a candidate to family, friends and neighbors and requiring very little actual monetary spending. I believe that the efficiency of the internet and social media may play a major role in the future of true “grassroots” campaigns.
Thank you again for your support,
Ray Petersen
8/13/2026
Dear Ray,
Thank you for running for the MN State Legislature.
What is your position on repealing the mandate portion of Minn. Stat. 144.145, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/144.145, the statewide water fluoridation mandate?
Minn. Stat. § 144.145 violates the intent of the Nuremberg Code and jus cogens principles of international norms related to bioethics and informed consent practices. 2005 UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, Article 6. The delineation between experimental and non-experimental medical procedures is arbitrary and meaningless within a human rights context.
Informed consent rests immutably with the affected individual.
Thousands of the people in Minnesota Do Not Consent with the State Legislature's poisoning of the public drinking water supplies with HYDROFLUOROSILICIC ACID
Notwithstanding everything, we have a human responsibility to put an end to this madness. When can I be free of this madness?
We need to create a policy framework directed toward the removal of fluoride and fluoride derivatives in drinking water and remind everyone again that the State Government has no legitimate authority to take actions that far exceed even the recognized authorities of licensed medical doctors by forcing people to involuntarily, and often unknowingly, consume dubious, noxious substances. It's not the government's business to add substances to water that are designed to treat human beings. That's like distributing drugs in the public drinking water, which is crazy.
The only known legitimate use of fluoride and its derivatives in the human body is a TOPICAL application to the tooth enamel. Fluoride has NO systemic use in the human body; and ingestion is toxic to multiple organs including the pineal gland and even at microscopic levels down to the body's enzymes.
Fluoride is a known neurotoxin, and there is significant pressure to cover up this fact. Yet, even if you look at exposure studies in Asia (India, China, etc.) with high levels of water fluoride (9-10 ppm) we find the association abundantly clear (if my memory serves me). If I am not mistaken, the federal government has set the maximum exposure limit (EPA) for fluoride in water as 4.0 ppm (fluorosis-related). The current concentration is 0.7 ppm (in MN tap water), and was revised downwards from 1 ppm recently. However, this is not a significant toxicological margin of safety!!! A proper MOS, is AT LEAST 10x. With fluoride derivatives, it ought to be 100x. Consequently, our MCLG in MN for fluoride in water must be set at ZERO.
Among other toxic effects that are under-investigated.
I have contacted Ms. Quade and John Huot, unsuprisingly, to no effect. However, I did get a Democrat from St. Paul when I was living there to agree with the position that we need to change 144.145 to remove the statewide mandate aspect of it. Also, Mr. Huot was surprised to learn fluoride was used at one point as a hyperthyroid medicine. Merck Manuals 1950s report that. I can send source. And with this stuff all over, one wonders whether it contributes to the fact levothyroxine is about the 3rd most prescribed medicine in America. (we are poisoned by fluoride, all sources, and iodine deficient, collectively.)
Apologies for the capital letters, I'm not trying to yell over email, that's just how I talk.
This would be a great way to political expose Ms. Quade; she has definitely not responded to any of my requests for a position statement from her office. This can be a non-partisan issue.
Thank you for your time and consideration to this vital matter.
Scientific citation: The Case against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep It There, by Connett PhD et al.
Until the truth prevails,
S
Eagan, MN
Senate District 56, Constituent
8/17/2026
S,
You clearly have done significant research on and are passionate about this cause (far more than I have done to this point). While I am not willing to commit to an exact position at this time, I do respect and have concerns for the safety of our potable water supplies. I have experience making and treating fresh water from my time as an engineer in the US Navy. We did not add for fluoride.
I will keep your views in mind if the people of MN District 56 choose to have me represent them in the Senate.
Thank you for your input,
Ray Petersen
8/5/2026
Dear Sir,
What are your positions on ICE, ILLEGAL immigration, abortion, President Trump, & prosecuting & REMOVING Somali pirates from our state?
… …
I imagine you must be busy, but I would appreciate a response as no response = a "no" vote.
Thank you,
K W
8/6/2026
Dear K,
The immigration enforcement role of ICE has been around for over 100 years in one form or another. It’s role is to enforce the laws created by congress. It would normally do this discreetly, but over the last decade in particular, we have had politicians that have decided they can gain politically if they instigate mass unrest against these federal agents rather than work with members of the other party on modifications to the law. If people get killed while interfering with law enforcement, all the better for their political fortunes. I myself fully support our law enforcement personnel, but I am not a politician, just a concerned citizen that has had enough of politicians.
I have no problem with immigration as long as we set the terms and immigrants follow those terms. I don’t believe in the term illegal (or undocumented) immigration any more than someone breaking into my house would be referred to as an uninvited guest. It is a foreign invasion. In 1986 congress agreed to an amnesty act called the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). It provided amnesty to “undocumented” immigrants that were here prior to 1982 in return for stronger enforcement and penalties. Clearly it has been a failure.
My religious belief on abortion is that it is morally wrong from conception. Unfortunately, I cannot allow my religious beliefs to be the determining factor as matter of making laws, any more than I am willing to accept anyone else’s religious beliefs in the same. Therefore I have to base my political view on the practical effect on the child. I believe that when the baby develops to the point of self awareness, it deserves all the rights and privileges of any other person. I believe that this is around the end of the first trimester of pregnancy. Neither side of the abortion issue will ever agree to this as abortion is a major money raiser for both political parties and they are unwilling to kill the “golden goose.”
I have and still support President Trump, and though I do not agree with him on everything, the fact that he keeps both parties in continual consternation brings me great satisfaction.
I believe anyone that commits crimes should be fully prosecuted and if an immigrant, deported. Nearly six decades of experience has taught me to view everyone as individuals. Every group is going to have those that commit crimes both within and outside that group. Our nation has a long history of vilifying various ethnic groups. I know, work with and consider friends many Somali, along with members of virtually every other group that can be defined (yes even Democrats).
Thank you for your thoughtfulness toward our electoral process.
Respectfully,
Raymond Petersen
7/15/2026
Dear N.:
Thank you for your email. I am happy to give you my views on these topics, though I believe from the context of your questions you may not like them.
Before I answer your specific questions, I would like to state that I work with and consider friends many people of different religions and ethnicities. After nearly 60 years of life experience I have learned to consider every person individually rather than as a member of a community. I know that many members of those communities feel the same regardless of what pundits would have us believe.
I have financially supported and voted for President Trump for three elections. My support was initially based on the fact that both parties rejected him, and I was very tired of the major parties’ control of the government. My support has grown to be about his respect for individual freedoms now being more fervently espoused by Republicans over the subservient collectivism that Democrats appear to be increasingly embracing. While I do not agree with him on every position (no two people ever do), I agree on most things.
Discrimination always has and always will exist. Humans are born attracted to people that are most similar to themselves and fearful of those that are different. People have to learn through experience that differences are safe. Discrimination cannot be legislated away for that just breeds resentment and further strengthens discrimination. Legislation must be based on the rights of individuals.
Laws need to be enforced. There are means to change immigration laws that do not require violence against the people charged with enforcing them. The primary reforms currently needed are replacing those in public office and government bureaucracy that feel they can ignore or outright violate laws that they don’t like while inciting others to risk their and others lives to interfere with the enforcement of those laws.
Everyone is living on conquered land. Everyone’s ancestors have been both oppressors and oppressed. Everyone has the choice to continue re-fighting the wars of their ancestors or creating the future of their progeny, but rarely both. As far as the Palestinians, for decades I have watched with both hope and dismay as they have fluctuated between the two. Israel has a right to protect its people, but even if they were to disappear tomorrow the Palestinians would still be oppressed by the same authoritarian regime they are now.
The easiest way to manipulate people is convincing them that their current circumstances are somebody else’s fault. The belief of victimhood absolves them of the responsibility to take action for improvement and accountability for actions detrimental to their situation. Politicians have controlled people for generations in this manner.
Again, Thank you for your engagement in the electoral process. I hope this helps with your decision making.
Respectfully,
Raymond Petersen
7/11/2026
Dear Ray,
Hi! My name is N. H., and I am a University of Minnesota student and a lifelong Minnesota resident. I am actively involved in my local Muslim community through volunteering and community service. As I prepare to vote in the upcoming election, I have been reaching out to candidates to better understand not only their policy positions, but also the values that guide them.
I would appreciate your perspective on several issues that are especially important to me and many members of my community: Your opinions on these key topics are critical to my morals and ethics, and heavily influence my choice when voting.
How would you describe your approach to President Donald Trump and the direction he represents for the country?
What specific steps do you support to address Islamophobia, anti-Muslim discrimination, and racism in Minnesota and across the United States?
What are your views on ICE and immigration enforcement? Are there reforms you believe are necessary?
What is your position on the war in Gaza? Do you believe Israel's actions constitute genocide, and why or why not? Regardless of what authority your office may have over foreign policy, I believe a candidate's willingness to speak clearly on humanitarian issues reflects their values and moral judgment, and that this is one of the largest moral crimes of our time.
I understand that not every office has direct influence over federal immigration or foreign policy. However, I believe elected officials' responses to these issues provide insight into the principles that shape their leadership and decision-making.
I would greatly appreciate any response you are willing to provide. Thank you for your time, and for your willingness to serve the people of Minnesota.
Sincerely,
N. H.