CNN Host Asks Todd Blanche: Is It Illegal To Have Two Candidates With The Same Name On A Ballot?

Rifler

All-American
Jan 26, 2011
6,264
7,118
113
Unbelievable how Dana Bash demonstrates on a daily basis how she is truly dumber than a box of rocks...
 

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
135,471
23,841
113
I had to ask chatGPT what's going on. Certainly seems like an intentional effort to mislead voters.


Alaska has an unusual controversy in its 2026 U.S. Senate election: two candidates named Dan Sullivan are on the same ballot, and Republicans allege that one entered the race specifically to confuse voters.

It's now escalated into a federal lawsuit that could affect certification of the November 3 election results.

Who are the two Dan Sullivans?​

Incumbent senatorChallenger
NameDan S. SullivanDaniel J. Sullivan Jr.
BackgroundTwo-term U.S. senatorRetired schoolteacher
Ballot designationRegistered Republican, incumbentNo party affiliation listed
Role in electionSeeking reelectionIndependent challenger
The other major candidate is Democrat Mary Peltola.

Why Republicans say it's intentional​

Alaska election officials initially disqualified Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. in June, citing several suspicious circumstances:

  1. He initially requested a ballot name using the incumbent senator's middle initial, S, even though his own middle initial is J.
  2. He changed his party registration to Republican shortly before filing.
  3. His campaign website reportedly resembled the incumbent's in its design and colors.
  4. He worked with a political consultant who had previously supported Democrats.
These were findings and concerns identified by Alaska election officials, not proof that Democrats orchestrated the candidacy.


The Alaska Supreme Court subsequently allowed the challenger onto the ballot. He maintains that he's a legitimate candidate dissatisfied with the incumbent, and Peltola's campaign denies involvement.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: MTTiger19

dpic73

Heisman
Jul 27, 2005
36,487
33,823
113

Aardvark86

All-Conference
Oct 12, 2021
2,539
3,562
113
Merely having two persons with the same name? No

intentionally placing same named person to mislead? May be ok too but it probably depends on what actual statutes governing “election fraud” actually say. If they’re general enough to use a term like “election fraud,” I’d think this would be an easy yes. Consider, for example how “consumer fraud” laws have been construed to prohibit trade practices, names, and products intended to or causing confusion. But I suspect that election laws are written a little more specifically.
 

firegiver

Heisman
Sep 10, 2007
74,637
21,809
113
I had to ask chatGPT what's going on. Certainly seems like an intentional effort to mislead voters.


Alaska has an unusual controversy in its 2026 U.S. Senate election: two candidates named Dan Sullivan are on the same ballot, and Republicans allege that one entered the race specifically to confuse voters.

It's now escalated into a federal lawsuit that could affect certification of the November 3 election results.

Who are the two Dan Sullivans?​

Incumbent senatorChallenger
NameDan S. SullivanDaniel J. Sullivan Jr.
BackgroundTwo-term U.S. senatorRetired schoolteacher
Ballot designationRegistered Republican, incumbentNo party affiliation listed
Role in electionSeeking reelectionIndependent challenger
The other major candidate is Democrat Mary Peltola.

Why Republicans say it's intentional​

Alaska election officials initially disqualified Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. in June, citing several suspicious circumstances:

  1. He initially requested a ballot name using the incumbent senator's middle initial, S, even though his own middle initial is J.
  2. He changed his party registration to Republican shortly before filing.
  3. His campaign website reportedly resembled the incumbent's in its design and colors.
  4. He worked with a political consultant who had previously supported Democrats.
These were findings and concerns identified by Alaska election officials, not proof that Democrats orchestrated the candidacy.


The Alaska Supreme Court subsequently allowed the challenger onto the ballot. He maintains that he's a legitimate candidate dissatisfied with the incumbent, and Peltola's campaign denies involvement.
looks like dirty tactics to me, but is it illegal? Probably not.
If a person named Michael Jordan legally ran for office against a famous Michael Jordan and campaigned on "Vote Michael Jordan," that would likely be confusing but not automatically illegal.
If that same person filed paperwork falsely claiming to be the famous Michael Jordan or forged identifying information, that could become illegal.

However, many times its been discussed here racial gerrymandering is illegal. And yet we've watched the GOP try to gerrymander there way to more seats in the house by giving larger voting power to hispanics. Thats blowing up in their face, but is likely illegal.. anywho. Looks like the Dems are fighting dirty tactics with dirty tactics.
 
Tiger Illustrated

Latest

  1. 01 Tiger Illustrated Football Clemson vs. Florida State: Behind Enemy Lines
  2. 02 Tiger Illustrated Football Thursday Clemson Football Insider
  3. 03 Tiger Illustrated Football Wednesday Evening Clemson Football Insider: Backup O-linemen, Clemson’s gradual descent, Graham Neff, Gideon Davidson, how change can come about
  4. 04 Tiger Illustrated Football What we are hearing inside of Clemson's confusing quarterback situation
  5. 05 Tiger Illustrated Football Wednesday Clemson Football Insider: portal intel, transfer O-tackle targets, Dabo Swinney's roster management