Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system is emerging as a central concern for Republicans trying to protect Senator Dan S. Sullivan in a closely fought Senate race against former Democratic representative Mary Peltola.
Sullivan is facing a further complication from Dan J. Sullivan Jr, a retired teacher with the same name who is also standing in the four-way general election. Republican operatives fear the challenger could take enough first-choice votes from the incumbent to affect the result.
Under Alaska’s system, voters can rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 per cent of the initial vote, the lowest-placed candidates are eliminated and their votes redistributed according to voters’ next choices.
Two recent polls that simulated the ranked-choice count showed Ms Peltola winning. Republicans are concerned that supporters of the long-shot Dan J. Sullivan may not list the senator as a second choice, leaving him vulnerable when later preferences are counted.
Art Hackney, an ally of the senator who runs a super political action committee supporting him, said the challenger was “going to get a percent of the vote” and warned that this could be “potentially” significant to the outcome.
“Sullivan can win … but it makes it a heck of a lot harder,” said a Republican operative working on other Alaska races. “It’s what the race is going to come down to: If he loses, it’ll for sure be because of that. And if he wins, it’ll be in spite of that.”
Republicans campaign against ranked-choice voting
Republicans have long criticised ranked-choice voting as costly and confusing, arguing that it has weakened their party’s prospects in Alaska. Outgoing Republican governor Mike Dunleavy and President Donald Trump have backed a ballot measure seeking to repeal the system this autumn, after an earlier attempt failed two years ago.
Speaking at a rally in Wasilla last week, Mr Trump said the second Sullivan could receive “1% or 2% or 3%” under what he called the “phony ranked choice stuff”. He added: “You never know what they’re going to do with it. It could be the difference.”
The issue has already shaped recent Alaska contests. Ms Peltola benefited from a divided Republican field in her House victory, while Republican senator Lisa Murkowski defeated a Trump-backed challenger in 2022 in part because of ranked-choice voting.
Republicans are also concerned about this year’s governor’s race, in which three Republican candidates are competing. Party supporters have urged voters to “rank the red” so that Republican candidates remain competitive through later rounds of counting.
The two Sullivans are distinguished on the ballot by their middle initials and party affiliation. The incumbent is listed as a Republican, while Dan J. Sullivan appears without a party affiliation.
Senator Sullivan’s campaign and allied groups are taking steps to prevent voters from confusing the candidates. His supporters are distributing rubber wristbands carrying his name and party affiliation, while a radio jingle produced with the National Republican Senatorial Committee urges voters to select “Dan S.” first.
“Dan S. is your No. 1,” the jingle says. “If he’s not, rank him second, don’t throw your vote away.” It also tells voters: “Dan S., Daniel, Gerry — just don’t rank Mary.”
Nate Adams, a spokesman for the senator, said the campaign was working to ensure voters could identify the incumbent through ballot facsimiles in mailings, doorstep and telephone contact, and the radio jingle.
Groups supporting Mr Sullivan, including Americans for Prosperity Action and Club for Growth Action, have also been contacting voters. Their messages have urged people to rank the incumbent first, although one Club for Growth mailer advised voters to make him their “1ST CHOICE and ONLY CHOICE”.
Kevin Greene, a senior adviser to Americans for Prosperity Action in Alaska, said: “In a tight election, it doesn’t take a ton of people to get confused to possibly change the trajectory and the outcome.”
The groups campaigning to retain ranked-choice voting argue that it reduces the so-called spoiler effect. The organisation behind this year’s repeal measure said it was a non-partisan effort focused solely on removing the system.
