Two candidates named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot in Alaska’s U.S. Senate election. In most states, the “other” Dan Sullivan – a retired teacher named Daniel J. Sullivan – could spoil the race for the incumbent Senator Dan Sullivan. Because Alaska uses ranked choice voting, this attempt to “spoil” the race is unlikely to work.

Watch the video below, and read on for elected officials, journalists, and scholars describing how RCV solves the “two Dan Sullivans” problem.

John Oliver, Host of Last Week Tonight: “Alaska actually uses ranked choice voting. So, any theoretical person who doesn’t know what ‘incumbent’ means and wants to make sure their vote is going to Senator Dan Sullivan can just rank both [Sullivans] on the ballot. And again, none of that makes what Democrats are being accused of good or okay. But it does make it stupid and meaningless.”

Chris Hayes, Host and Political Analyst for MS NOW : “I think it’s dirty pool. Like, I don’t think it’s cool, honestly… But, the big saving grace here – and I think this is a grand irony – ranked choice voting exists in Alaska… Ranked choice voting gives you a way out of this. You can just list all ‘Dans’ Sullivan and not list Mary Peltola, and you’ll be fine.”

Senator Dan S. Sullivan Campaign Ad Jingle: “Dan S. is your number 1, that’s what we say. If he’s not, rank him second, don’t throw your vote away. Dan S., Daniel, Gerry. Just don’t rank Mary.”

George Allen, former Republican Governor of Virginia: “Anybody who votes for the ‘joker’ Dan Sullivan first would probably… rank the other Dan Sullivan, the real Senator Dan Sullivan, second.”

Nathaniel Rakich, Managing Editor at Votebeat: “The irony about the Dan Sullivan situation is that #AKsen is the one race where it doesn’t have to matter! Voters can rank the Dans Sullivan 1st and 2nd and that solves the problem.”

Matthew Yglesias, founder of Slow Boring: “What is the point of the Multiple Dan Sullivans gambit in the context of Alaska’s electoral system? This would make more sense in literally any other state.”

The Economist: “Because Alaska uses ranked-choice voting, Alaskans who intend to pick the incumbent can rank both Sullivans ahead of Ms Peltola, to ensure that their votes won’t be wasted.” 

Ashley Lopez, Political Correspondent for NPR: “Alaska’s unique system could actually blunt the effects of any potential scheme… Because of rank choice voting, if voters are confused, they could rank both Dan Sullivans, or Dan Sullivans as I get to say, and not rank Peltola.”

Kellen Browning, Political Reporter for The New York Times: “I should note that Alaska has a system called ranked choice voting… If you are a Republican that’s fully filling out your ballot, you rank Dan J. Sullivan first, let’s say, but you rank Dan S. Sullivan, the incumbent senator second, he will ultimately get your vote because we anticipate Dan J. Sullivan will not be in contention.”

Matt Lewis, political writer & columnist for The Daily Beast: “Ranked choice voting mitigates the advantage… What you can do is go and vote for anybody named Dan Sullivan. That’s it. Just vote for both Dan Sullivans and leave.” 

• Chris Cillizza, political analyst & founder of So What?: “You’ll be fine.”

Carl Cannon, Executive Editor & Washington, DC Bureau Chief for RealClearPolitics: “I think actually that ranked choice voting might be the antidote to this [ballot-stacking in Alaska]. I think it helps mitigate it.”

Josh Barro, Co-Host of Central Air: “[Having two Dan Sullivans on the ballot in Alaska] might confuse some voters, but they have ranked choice voting. So you can rank both Dan Sullivans if you’re not sure which one you’re voting for.”

Mo Elleithee, Democratic strategist: “…the reason [the Dan Sullivan ‘ballot-stacking’ scheme is] boneheaded is because this is one of those stories where the headlines are going to be worse than the impact. Ranked choice voting, which they have in Alaska, will actually help mitigate any confusion. If people – the Senator Dan Sullivan campaign is a running ads saying rank Dan and Dan first and second.”

Stephen Richer, NBC News Political Contributor & Cato Institute Legal Fellow: “The strategy makes no sense given that the state uses ranked choice voting.”

Jessica Tarlov, Co-Host of Raging Moderates: “A boring side note about this, though… but it does matter a lot less in a ranked choice voting system. Just, like, putting that out into the ether. Again, still feel icky about it.”

Mike Murphy, Republican political consultant: “Now, they have ranked choice…. I like ranked choice. I think it actually deters mischief. The mischief we got going there is not ranked choice. It is—and this is the hilarious part—the idea: you’re running for Congress, I find somebody else with your name in the phone book, and I put them on the ballot to split your vote. Now, ranked choice works around that.” 

Lynn Vavreck, UCLA professor: “But this thing about… ranked choice voting is so important. Like, do not get suckered into thinking this is a plurality election and, like, the story that you guys were just telling about, you know, the Kennedy story. You know, it’s not like the Sullivans are going to split the vote. No, it’s actually — as long as the person ranks them both, they will get each other’s votes.”

Russell Luke, University of Alaska Fairbanks professor: “In the unlikely event that voters are confused about which Sullivan to vote for, Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system provides voters the ability to rank both.”

Note: This content is for educational and informational purposes only. FairVote is a 501(c)(3) organization and does not support or oppose any candidate for elected public office.