Alaska Senate race pits Sullivan vs. Sullivan. Is it a plot?

As the fight for control of the U.S. Senate grows increasingly competitive, eyes turn north to Alaska and a contest pitting Dan Sullivan against Dan Sullivan among the contenders — and no, this isn’t about a candidate living a double life or wrestling with his own demons.

Confused?

That might be the point.

Daniel S. Sullivan is a two-term Republican senator from Alaska. He is seeking re-election in November.

Daniel J. Sullivan is a retired school teacher and political novice. She describes herself as an independent Republican cut from the same fleece lining as Lisa Murkowski, the state’s maverick GOP senator.

Political obstacles give Daniel J. Sullivan has little chance of winning the highly competitive race. So is there another reason why he ran away? Is his presence at the ballot box intended to distract enough confused voters from the incumbent to elect his Democratic opponent, former Rep. Mary Peltola?

Republicans think so. And you don’t have to stand on the banks of the Kenai River to smell something suspicious.

When Daniel J. Sullivan launched his campaign in May, he did so as a regular “Dan Sullivan,” with a website very similar to the incumbent’s. The press release announcing her candidacy was written by an “Amber Lee”. There is a political strategist from Alaska named Amber Lee who has supported Peltola in the past.

(For such a sparsely populated state, there are certainly a lot of twins in this political saga.)

Election officials said Daniel J. Sullivan wanted to appear on the ballot as a Republican even though he had no previous affiliation with the party. In fact, he had donated money to Democrats, including Peltola, over the years. He also asked to be listed as “Dan” on the ballot. S.. Before Sullivan changed his mind, a state attorney told the Alaska Supreme Court, which took up the issue late last month.

“This is not an innocent mistake or a random mistake,” Chris Murray told the judges. “There are many other letters of the alphabet that could be misspelled.”

Political consultant Amber Lee declined to comment when reached by the Anchorage Daily News. He did not respond to an email from your friendly political columnist.

Daniel J. Sullivan, however, denied any malice or malice.

“It’s my choice,” he told the Associated Press. He said he had no contact with Peltola’s campaign — “zero, none, zero” — and denied that he had been contacted by the state Democratic Party or any national Democratic operatives about running.

Peltola’s campaign has staunchly denied any involvement. So is the Alaska Democratic Party and the Democrats’ national Senate campaign committee.

Following an investigation, Daniel J. Sullivan was removed from the August 18 primary. Carol Beecher, head of the Alaska Division of Elections, said his candidacy aims to “confuse or mislead” voters.

But the state’s high court overturned that decision, ordering election officials to find a way to keep Daniel J. Sullivan’s name on the ballot “within the limits of existing Alaska ballot design law.”

It’s been nearly 20 years since the state sent a Democrat to the U.S. Senate, but thanks to Peltola, this election looks set to offer the party its best shot in years.

Jessica Taylor of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report called him the “ideal recruit,” given Peltola’s fundraising prowess and ability to outperform other Democrats while avoiding the toxic taint of the national party. (Peltola’s slogan—”Fish, family, and freedom”—is as far away from the Democrat image that drives the Whole Foods shopping Prius.)

Democrats need to win four seats in November to take control of the Senate from a menu that includes Alaska, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas, while also holding on to contested Senate seats in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire. Cook Political Report rates Alaska as one of the few hurling races in the group.

The state has a ranked-choice voting system, with the top four vote-getters advancing through November. Ivan Moore, a nonpartisan voter in Alaska, said the system virtually guarantees that Sullivan and Sullivan will face each other in a runoff that includes Peltola. At this point, Moore suggested, most voters’ choices will be clear.

According to the solution developed by state election officials, the senator “Sullivan, Dan S.” will be listed as. and as “(Registered Republican) Incumbent.” His opponent’s name is “Sullivan, Daniel J. Jr.” will be. without any party affiliation.

“I’m guessing there are some people out there who don’t know what the word ‘officer’ means,” Moore said. “But I have a hard time believing that people who are determined to vote for Senator Dan S. Sullivan would go to the voting booth and vote for the wrong person when Dan S. has the word ‘incumbent’ next to his name and Dan J. has no party affiliation.”

Political unrest is nothing new. But as the old saying that everyone is in love and war is increasingly applied to campaigns and elections, the level of partisan gamesmanship seems to be increasing.

It was a novelty in 2002 for Democrats to intervene in the California Republican primary to support their preferred candidate. This is now common practice.

Redistricting, or redrawing, of the nation’s congressional boundaries to reflect changes in population would occur every ten years after the national census. But last year, at the urging of President Trump, there was an arms race among states, including California, that changed their political maps to favor a favored party, essentially deciding House races before a single vote had been cast.

As another old saying goes, politics is not a puff.

But it doesn’t have to be so biased and cynical. There’s no need for fishy candidates like Daniel J. Sullivan.