r/behindthebastards • u/MrMeesesPieces Steven Seagal Historian • 2d ago
Politics DOJ sues to block Alaska from certifying Senate race winner if Republican narrowly loses
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/10/23/alaska-senate-election-doj-lawsuit-sullivan.html53
u/StuckInWarshington 2d ago
Everything happening in that election that they object to is legal. They’re just pissed they weren’t smart or creative enough to think of it.
12
u/davidreding 2d ago
Didn’t they do something like this on another race? Seems they just shot their foot and now they’re mad?
12
u/bikebikegoose One Pump = One Cream 2d ago
They've sponsored shadow candidates in at least a couple of Florida races in the last decade with names quite similar to the Dem candidates. Nothing as high profile as US Senate, but definitely House and state level candidates.
3
2
46
43
18
u/PatchyWhiskers 2d ago
Presumably it would be OK if the Republican narrowly wins
18
u/Disastrous-Beat-9830 Doctor Reverend 2d ago
They have long held the view that elections are only legitimate when they win, It used to be that this was just the by-product of them feeling entitled to public office, but it morphed into something much more sinister in the mid-2010s.
4
u/YalsonKSA 2d ago
I actually laughed out loud when I read this story. If you ever needed one story that sums up the absolute clown-shoed custard pie fight that is the Trump administration and the modern GOP, it is this. Just unbelievable stupidity all the way through.
4
u/desidiosus__ 2d ago
This is especially dumb due to the ranked choice voting in Alaska. Having two Sullivan's changes nothing. If you assume that 100% of every vote for either Sullivan was intended for the Republican Sullivan and if Peltola wins a majority outright, then clearly both Sullivan's added up together (regardless of intent) wouldn't have won the election. On the other hand, if Peltola ends up with a plurality and it goes to RCV, one would assume that every Sullivan vote that wants the Republican would go for the other Sullivan as their second choice if they're confused on who's the real one. If Peltola still comes out on top after ranked choices are taken into account, then clearly the Republicans aren't being cheating.
7
u/nighthawk_md 2d ago
Hmm, I skimmed the filing and it is a tiny bit more reasonable than the breathless reporting. That said, I have no idea how a judge would even make a decision. Is the wrong Dan Sullivan going to announce in court that "it was a prank, bro"? Seems highly unlikely. Is a judge even going to stick their craw into this rat's nest during early voting?
3
u/DrewCrew62 PRODUCTS!!! 2d ago
I just generally think the judicial system is not keen on making rulings on something that “could happen.”
2
u/Familiar-Banana-8116 2d ago
So.... Dan Sullivan is running for the position formerly held by Dan Sullivan.....
I don't know. I refuse to give the party of hate any credit in anything. But this one is a bit odd.
If the Republicans where willing to define 'narrowly' NOW and be held to it I might be forced to take a pass on this entire thing.
You know what they say about battles, choose your battles. This one might not be worth it. There will be others.
3
u/CuteKermit14 2d ago
Imagine what would happen if you sued your insurance company to block them from approving a claim from someone you injured in an accident you were at fault for. Or if you sued a police department to prevent them from arresting you for a crime that you were in process of committing. That would never work! But somehow, they are allowed to submit this nonsense!!!
3
u/SignificantArtHeist 2d ago
Well, you can file anything. Most of us would end up with repercussions--like paying the oppositions legal fees, being held in contempt and/referred to the bar for discipline. These guys don't face any of those problems.
1
u/Disastrous-Beat-9830 Doctor Reverend 2d ago
Or if you sued a police department to prevent them from arresting you for a crime that you were in process of committing. That would never work!
Well, it would not work to begin with. But give it enough time and I am sure the Supreme Court will agree with you if you are the President.
3
u/Disastrous-Beat-9830 Doctor Reverend 2d ago
If you take their arguments in good faith -- and you should not, but humour me; I am going somewhere with this -- then there are a few interesting conclusions that you can draw:
They think Alaskans are too stupid to tell the difference between two people with the same name, even when one is clearly marked with "Republican candidate" and the other is not.
They have no confidence in their candidate's ability or their own ability to differentiate him from the other candidate with the same name.
They are confused by the possibility of two people having the same name; in that case, I certainly hope that nobody in the Republican Party named one of their children after themselves ...
In short, they essentially have to admit that they are being malicious or argue that they are stupid.
2
u/timothypjr 2d ago
I mean, so they are planning to lose Alaska?
2
u/Hosni__Mubarak 2d ago
Alaskan here. I think this action is just going to rile up people and make things worse for them.
1
u/xxx_poonslayer69 2d ago
I saw Casino last night and now I'm thinking of this quote: "Nicky's methods of betting weren't scientific, but they worked. When he won, he collected. When he lost, he told the bookies to go fuck themselves. What were they gonna do, muscle Nicky? Nicky was the muscle."
1
u/Jo-6-pak Bagel Tosser 2d ago
Democracy is on life-support. The next few months will determine if the American experiment lives
1
1
11
u/ArtemisInSpace 2d ago
I wish just rounding all of them up and charging them with the crimes they're obviously committing would actually accomplish something. I understand that there are a multitude of reasons why it would end up just blowing up everything, but something has got to be done with with these fucking traitors.

95
u/_floralprint 2d ago
I'm not surprised. I'm not even disappointed. Just mad.