← Election Series · All statewide races

Our verdict

LiberalMind endorses Scott Fitzpatrick

Election Day is November 3. Missouri has exactly one statewide executive race on the 2026 ballot — state auditor — because the auditor alone sits on the midterm cycle while the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer all sit on the presidential cycle and are next chosen in 2028. Republican Scott Fitzpatrick, the auditor since January 9, 2023, seeks a second term against Democrat Quentin Wilson, a former director of the Missouri Department of Revenue running his first campaign for any office, and Libertarian Dustin Coffell, chair of the Libertarian Party of Missouri. The one public poll with published numbers — Saint Louis University / YouGov, August 13–24, 2026 — has it Fitzpatrick 45, Wilson 43, inside its ±5.9 margin. Fitzpatrick holds roughly a 4-to-1 advantage in money raised and 12-to-1 in cash on hand as of September 30, on the named compilation below. LiberalMind endorses Scott Fitzpatrick. Read the research, claim by claim, and see why — including why this is the closest call in this group.

How Missouri got here

The state auditor is Missouri's independent fiscal watchdog and chief accountant, auditing state and local government spending, on a four-year term elected in 2022 and 2026. Fitzpatrick is, in the words of the WashU Student Life voter guide (September 30, 2026), "the only statewide official up for reelection" in Missouri in 2026, in a year with no U.S. Senate race in the state; the Missouri Independent, via KRPS, states it directly: "There is only one statewide race, for state auditor." Turnout is therefore this race's big unknown — the last time the auditor's race stood alone on the ballot, about 1.4 million Missourians voted (Missouri Independent via KRPS).

The primaries were held August 4, 2026. Fitzpatrick defeated Gerald Wistrand Jr. in the Republican primary; Wilson defeated Gregory Upchurch in the Democratic primary; Coffell was unopposed in the Libertarian primary. The primary vote totals conflict sharply between compilations, and we print no raw total from either: Ballotpedia gives Fitzpatrick 353,217 (85.6%) to Wistrand's 59,562 (14.4%), and Wilson 194,999 (68.2%) to Upchurch's 90,853 (31.8%). Wikipedia gives Fitzpatrick 549,997 (85.5%) to Wistrand's 93,012 (14.5%), and Wilson 325,648 (67.8%) to Upchurch's 154,346 (32.2%). The percentages agree — about 86% and about 68% — and the totals do not, suggesting one compilation captured a partial-reporting snapshot. Percentages are printed; totals are not, until the Missouri Secretary of State's certified results are pulled. The conflict is the fact, and it is printed as a conflict, never averaged.

The confirmed general-election roster, on the concordance of Ballotpedia, BallotReady and the Green Papers: Scott Fitzpatrick (Republican, incumbent); Quentin Wilson (Democratic); Dustin Coffell (Libertarian).

There is no formal race rating — Cook, Inside Elections and Sabato do not rate this office — in the research located. The competitiveness evidence is polling. Saint Louis University / YouGov, August 13–24, 2026, 449 likely voters, ±5.9: Fitzpatrick 45, Wilson 43, other 2, undecided 10. A second poll exists and its numbers are not printed here: Remington Research Group for Missouri Scout, October 14–15, 2026, 684 likely voters, ±3.7, was conducted and its auditor question — naming all three candidates — is documented, but the question's percentages were not present in the portion of the release retrieved in this research. We do not cite a Remington number until the full release is pulled.

The money, printed as a named compilation with its dates and boundaries, never averaged. Per Missouri Independent money tracking of Missouri Ethics Commission filings, via Griffon News: Fitzpatrick's candidate committee raised $536,286 since the start of 2025, held $484,097 cash on hand on September 30, 2026, and spent only $7,553 since the August primary. A pro-Fitzpatrick PAC raised slightly more than his campaign committee and held about $30,000 more on hand than the campaign on September 30 — about $514,000; the only broadcast ads tracked in the race are $63,000 by that PAC in Springfield. That PAC's name is a genuine conflict in the sources: the Independent / Griffon account names it "Missourians for a Responsible Budget," while Missouri Scout names the pro-Fitzpatrick PAC running the anti-Wilson ad "Citizens for a Responsible Budget." One name is wrong, or there are two committees; we print both names as a conflict and adopt neither, pending Missouri Ethics Commission records. Wilson's candidate committee raised just under $125,000, spent $10,506 since the primary, and held $40,200 cash on hand on September 30, 2026. On these figures Fitzpatrick holds roughly a 4-to-1 raised / 12-to-1 cash advantage as of September 30 — printed with that source and date attached; October reports were not pulled. State reporting adds that neither candidate "has raised large sums this year," with heavy 2026 spending in ballot measures instead (Missouri Independent via KRPS). No finance figures were located for Coffell.

Scott Fitzpatrick (Republican) — proven, up a full career ladder

Background and service: State representative and House Budget Chair; appointed state treasurer by Governor Parson, sworn in January 14, 2019, serving until January 9, 2023, when he was sworn in as Missouri's 39th state auditor after winning the 2022 election (Missouri State Auditor's Office; Green Papers). As treasurer in 2022 he helped launch the MO Scholars school-voucher program — proponents of public education have heavily criticized the program (St. Louis Public Radio / KRPS, August 28, 2026); that criticism is printed as attributed criticism of a program he launched, at that strength.

The audit record in office, from his office's releases and state coverage: His office's audit of St. Louis Public Schools rated the district "poor"; on August 27–28, 2026 he publicly called on the State Board of Education and legislators to consider a new governance structure for the district, citing "massive operational distress" for its 16,000-plus students, after the state board had already lowered SLPS accreditation to provisional in January. His office rated the Property Tax Credit program — the state's fourth-largest tax credit — "poor": incomplete claims approved, eligible claims denied, incorrect amounts awarded, and the Department of Revenue failing to retain documentation in some cases, exposing the program to fraud risk and giving the Legislature incomplete information. His office issued "excellent" — the highest — ratings with no findings for the state treasurer's office he himself formerly held, and he recused himself from both of those audits because they covered his own tenure as treasurer. Both halves are printed, as the research instructs: clean findings, self-recusal. His 2026 activity also includes a performance audit of Department of Revenue customer service (July 2026) and a prosecutor-requested audit of the City of Holden after its former treasurer was charged with felony identity theft and stealing over an alleged $100,000-plus in personal credit-card use (Auditor's Office, July 17, 2026).

The documented version of the cross-party point is in those findings themselves: a Republican auditor issuing "poor" ratings to programs administered under a Republican administration, and recusing himself from audits of his own former office. A secondary analysis claiming broader cross-party scrutiny on his behalf is in the research only as an AI-generated alignment summary — treated as a lead, not a source, and not relied on here.

Endorsements, printed at their exact scope: The Missouri AFL-CIO and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch endorsed him in the primary — and those same two also endorsed Wilson in the Democratic primary. They were primary-stage, party-side endorsements, not general-election cross-endorsements, and we do not print them as such.

No scandal or disciplinary record concerning Fitzpatrick was located in the sources consulted.

Pros: Proven at every rung below this office — legislator, budget chair, treasurer, then elected auditor — and proven in this office with a specific, public audit record: "poor" ratings where his office found failure, including in programs of his own party's administration, and a documented recusal where the audit touched his own tenure. A large money advantage on the named September 30 figures. He is the only candidate in this race who has done the job he is asking for.

Cons: The race is genuinely close on the one poll with published numbers — 45–43, inside the margin, with 10% undecided — despite that money advantage. His treasurer's-office audits returned "excellent" ratings for his own former office; the recusal is the documented mitigation and is printed with it, but a skeptical voter is entitled to weigh both halves, as we have. The MO Scholars program he helped launch remains criticized by public-education proponents, as attributed above.

The flaw, plainly: No proven flaw in service was located in this research. The priced items are proximity ones, stated exactly: self-adjacent "excellent" audit findings, mitigated by documented recusal, and a close poll that his money has not put away. Neither is a conduct flaw, and neither is priced as one.

Quentin Wilson (Democratic) — proven as an agency head, unproven as an elected official

Background and service: Former Director of the Missouri Department of Revenue and former Commissioner of Higher Education — the second role rests on a single secondary voter-guide source in this research and is flagged for verification; we print it at that strength and no stronger. Earlier: work for three St. Louis-area congressmen and state-government service in the 1990s–2000s, as a behind-the-scenes performance and management official rather than an elected one. This is his first campaign for any office — his own joking account puts his last race at "senior class president" (Politically Speaking podcast transcript via Podscan). He is therefore proven as a state agency head and unproven as an elected official — the second half is never a demerit under our doctrine.

His program: Move the auditor's office from legal-compliance auditing toward GAO-style performance auditing — evaluating impact and efficiency, not only whether money was spent legally. His framing is that Missouri was ranked the best-managed state in the 1990s (Governing Magazine) and now ranks about 31st overall and 41st on audit function — those rankings are his own figures from the podcast, candidate-stated and unverified against the rankings in this research, and are printed as such.

The attack on him, labeled as the research labels it: A pro-Fitzpatrick PAC ad calls him a "former lobbyist [who] mismanaged the Department of Revenue. Wilson left financial computer systems unsecured" (Missouri Scout's description of the ad). That is an opponent-PAC claim, unverified in this research. The research notes the tension a reader will notice — Fitzpatrick's auditor's office has also issued "poor" findings about DOR-administered programs — and states plainly that those findings concern specific programs and periods, that whether they overlap Wilson's tenure as DOR director is not established, and that Wilson's DOR tenure dates were not pinned in this pass. We do not merge the PAC claim and the audit findings into one claim, because the research does not.

The Manchin-test fact, stated plainly: No in-service breaks with his party on our values were located in Wilson's file. His documented service is administrative — revenue director, higher-education commissioner (single-source, flagged) — not a legislative record in which party breaks could appear, and his program — performance auditing — is a management proposal, not a values break. The exception our doctrine allows for a Democrat requires proven breaks in service; his file contains none to inspect.

Pros: Real executive-administrative experience running a major state department — more proven administrative record than a typical first-time challenger brings. A specific, substantive program for the office: performance auditing on the GAO model, directly responsive to findings like the Property Tax Credit audit's. He won a contested Democratic primary at about 68%, and he is within the margin in the only published poll.

Cons: Unproven as an elected official, in his first campaign. Badly out-raised on the named September 30 figures — just under $125,000 raised and $40,200 on hand against his opponent's $536,286 and $484,097. His signature framing numbers (31st / 41st) are unverified candidate-stated figures. The PAC attack on his DOR tenure is unverified — and, for the same reason, unrebutted on a pinned record in this file, because his tenure dates were not pinned.

The flaw, plainly: No proven flaw was located in this research. The PAC's mismanagement claim is printed as an unverified opponent claim and priced as exactly that — no more, no less. His priced limits are an unverified signature framing and the absence of any Manchin-test record, not a conduct flaw.

The minor candidates, briefly

Dustin Coffell (Libertarian) — chair of the Libertarian Party of Missouri (Wikipedia, citing KTTN filing-deadline coverage), unopposed in the Libertarian primary. His campaign themes, from his site as summarized by Ballot Brief: "your taxpayer watchdog, completely independent," and modernizing cybersecurity and data-privacy standards. The "other 2" in the Saint Louis University / YouGov poll is the only measured support figure in this file that could include him, and it is not broken out by candidate in the research. No other record, biography, or finance data was located for him. A standing check found no pedophile-association material meeting the proven standard for any candidate on this ballot — absence noted, nothing implied.

OUR CALL

LiberalMind endorses Scott Fitzpatrick.

This is the closest call in this group, and we say so in the piece rather than hide it. Wilson is not an empty-file challenger: he has run a state department, he proposes a real change in how the office audits, and he sits two points behind in the only published poll. What decides it under our doctrine is what his file does and does not contain. It contains no proven in-service break with his party on Constitution, capitalism, Christianity or freedom values — the Manchin test — and his program, however substantive as management, is not one. Against that stands an incumbent who has done this exact job in public: "poor" ratings issued where his office found failure, including under his own party's administration; a documented recusal from audits of his own former office; and no scandal or proven flaw located. The attacks on both men are printed at their true strength — an unverified PAC claim against Wilson, priced as rhetoric from an opponent; attributed program criticism against Fitzpatrick, priced as attributed criticism — and neither displaces the record comparison. Endorse the proven incumbent, and flag plainly, as we do here and in our report, that the poll makes the electorate's race closer than the doctrine's race.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Back to the Election Series