Somewhere in Alaska, a Democratic political operative reportedly went looking for a man named Dan Sullivan. Any Dan Sullivan would do, provided he could be persuaded to run for the United States Senate against another man named Dan Sullivan. A New York Times investigation published Wednesday said Democratic operatives spent months trying to recruit candidates who might confuse voters or siphon support from Republican Senator Dan Sullivan.
Their most promising discovery was a retired schoolteacher from Petersburg, Alaska, named Daniel J. The simplicity of the trick is…magnificent? After years of algorithmically amplified misinformation, anonymous political advertising, sophisticated voter targeting and dark-money organizations with names resembling charitable foundations, American politics has apparently rediscovered a dirty trick that can be explained in five seconds: find another guy with the same name.
The investigation described an elaborate effort involving Democratic consultants, campaign aides and discussions about engineering the ballot to improve former Representative Mary Peltola's chances. Her campaign and national Democrats have denied involvement in recruiting the second Sullivan, who maintains he entered the race independently. Whatever the final accounting of responsibility, the reported scheme belongs to a venerable American political tradition.
Some noteworthy examples: New York's Tammany Hall perfected the art of manipulating elections through patronage and the careful management of who got to vote for whom. Richard Nixon's operatives took a more personal approach, using political sabotage and espionage against opponents. The Watergate scandal ultimately exposed the operation and helped bring down his presidency.
Florida supplied a more recent example in 2020, when a ghost-candidate operation sought to divert votes in a closely contested state Senate race. The basic idea has survived every technological revolution in campaigning: give voters a misleading choice and hope enough of them take it. Alaska's variation unknowingly goes a step further, perhaps even explaining something about Donald Trump’s political appeal.
The president has spent years demonstrating the power of blunt, immediately intelligible political conflict. He is direct in his attacks and immediately identifies his enemies by name. His accusations need no explanation.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
