New Ballot Count Alters Alaska Senate Race, Which Remains Too Close to Call

Mary Peltola Expands Lead Over Dan Sullivan in Alaska Senate Race as Ranked-Choice Count Looms

Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola has widened her lead over Republican incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska, increasing pressure on the two-term senator as election officials continue counting ballots from the November 3 midterm election.

The latest results update released Tuesday showed Peltola ahead by 4,250 first-choice votes, an increase of more than 1,600 over her advantage in the previous update. The former congresswoman had 118,926 votes, approximately 49% of the total, compared with Sullivan’s 114,676 votes, or about 47.2%.

Although Peltola has strengthened her position, the contest remains unresolved. Alaska uses a ranked-choice voting system, meaning the candidate with the most first-choice votes does not necessarily win unless that candidate receives more than 50%.

The race also features two other candidates whose first-choice totals could influence the final result. Republican Gerald Heikes had 5,318 votes, while independent candidate Dan J. Sullivan, whose similar name to the incumbent has attracted attention, had 4,027 votes.

Together, the two candidates received more than 9,300 first-choice votes. Their ballots could become important during the ranked-choice tabulation, although their supporters’ preferences cannot automatically be assigned to either leading candidate.

The Alaska Division of Elections is scheduled to conduct the official ranked-choice tabulation on November 18, after additional eligible ballots have been reviewed and counted.

The result could determine whether Peltola unseats Sullivan or the Republican incumbent secures another term.

Peltola increases her advantage in the latest Alaska vote count

The latest update represented another favorable development for Peltola, who has steadily improved her position as additional ballots have been added to the statewide count.

On Monday, she held a lead of 2,517 votes. Tuesday’s update increased that advantage to 4,250, giving the Democratic candidate a stronger first-choice position as the remaining ballots are processed.

The increase came after election officials added tens of thousands of additional ballots to the statewide results. Alaska’s large geographic area, remote communities and reliance on absentee voting mean that election results can take longer to become complete than in many other states.

The Associated Press estimated that approximately 84% of ballots had been counted as of Wednesday, November 11. Additional results were still expected, meaning neither campaign could treat the preliminary figures as final.

Peltola’s growing advantage is significant because she entered the election as a challenger to an incumbent Republican senator who had previously won statewide elections.

Sullivan, who has represented Alaska in the Senate since 2015, is seeking another term. His campaign must now contend with both the remaining first-choice ballots and the possibility that ranked-choice transfers could affect the outcome.

For Peltola, the challenge is to maintain her advantage through the remaining counting process and the final tabulation.

Who is Dan J. Sullivan, the so-called “Decoy Dan”?

One unusual feature of the race is the presence of another candidate named Dan Sullivan.

The independent candidate, Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., is a retired teacher from Petersburg. His similar name to the incumbent Republican senator has attracted considerable attention during the campaign and vote-counting process.

Some Republican supporters have referred to him as “Decoy Dan,” suggesting that voters could confuse the two candidates when marking their ballots.

However, the independent candidate is a separate person running under his own name. His presence on the ballot does not establish that he was recruited by either campaign or that his candidacy was intended to benefit a particular party.

The independent candidate had received 4,027 first-choice votes in the latest update, representing approximately 1.7% of the reported total.

That number is close to the 4,250-vote difference between Peltola and the incumbent senator.

The comparison has become politically significant because the race could be decided by a relatively narrow margin. However, the independent candidate’s ballots will not automatically transfer to the Republican senator simply because they share a surname.

Under ranked-choice voting, the next preference marked by each voter determines where an eligible ballot goes after a candidate is eliminated.

Some voters may have ranked Dan S. Sullivan second. Others may have preferred Peltola, Heikes or another candidate. Some ballots may not contain another valid preference among the candidates remaining in the contest.

The actual distribution will depend on the rankings voters selected when they cast their ballots.

Gerald Heikes could also influence the final result

Republican candidate Gerald Heikes was third in the first-choice count, with 5,318 votes, or approximately 2.2%.

Heikes is a perennial candidate from Palmer, Alaska. Although he trails the two leading candidates by a substantial margin, his supporters could become important during the ranked-choice process.

If Heikes is eliminated, ballots that list another eligible candidate as the next preference can be transferred to that candidate.

This means that both Heikes and Daniel J. Sullivan could influence the final contest even though neither is currently close to winning on first-choice votes.

The combined first-choice totals for the two candidates exceeded 9,300. That is more than twice the current margin separating Peltola and the incumbent.

Nevertheless, the number of votes received by a candidate does not reveal how those voters ranked the remaining candidates. A candidate’s supporters may be divided between Peltola and Sullivan, or some may not have selected either finalist as another preference.

The final distribution therefore cannot be determined simply by adding the third- and fourth-place candidates’ totals to one of the leading candidates.

How Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system works

Alaska uses ranked-choice voting in its general elections for certain offices, including the U.S. Senate.

Rather than selecting only one candidate, voters can rank candidates in order of preference. A voter might select Peltola as the first choice, Sullivan as the second choice and Heikes as the third choice.

If no candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the ranked-choice tabulation begins.

The candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated first. Election officials then examine the ballots that supported that candidate and transfer each eligible ballot to the next-ranked candidate who remains in the contest.

The process continues as candidates are eliminated until a candidate wins the required majority of continuing ballots.

A ballot does not necessarily transfer every time a candidate is eliminated. If a voter has not ranked another eligible candidate, or has no remaining valid preference among the candidates still in the race, that ballot becomes inactive.

This is an important distinction in Alaska’s Senate contest because the number of first-choice votes received by the eliminated candidates is not the same as the number of votes that will ultimately be added to Peltola or Sullivan.

The ranked-choice system is designed to account for voters’ preferences beyond their initial selections, but the final outcome depends on the actual rankings recorded on the ballots.

Preliminary ballot analysis offers clues about the runoff

Both campaigns are examining cast vote records released by the Alaska Division of Elections to assess how the remaining preferences could affect the contest.

Cast vote records provide information about the rankings recorded on ballots that have already been scanned and processed. They can help analysts estimate how votes may move during a ranked-choice tabulation.

However, these records do not represent every ballot that remains outstanding, and they should not be treated as a final result.

A preliminary analysis published by the Alaska Beacon on November 11 examined the available ranking data and estimated that Sullivan could gain approximately 3,066 votes from redistributed ballots, compared with about 2,160 for Peltola.

That would represent a net gain of approximately 906 votes for the Republican senator.

Even under that preliminary estimate, however, Sullivan would not gain enough to overcome Peltola’s existing first-choice advantage.

The analysis also has an important limitation: it does not include 9,909 ballots from rural Alaska precincts where votes are initially counted by hand.

According to the Alaska Beacon’s reporting, approximately two-thirds of the first-choice votes among those rural ballots went to Peltola. That distribution could further influence the final calculation.

The data remains preliminary, and the official ranked-choice tabulation will determine the actual outcome.

Thousands of ballots remain before the official tabulation

Although Peltola has expanded her lead, election officials still have additional ballots to process.

Absentee voting is particularly important in Alaska, where residents in remote communities may rely on mail or other voting arrangements because of the distances involved.

The state also has to review eligible ballots and complete the procedures required before conducting the ranked-choice tabulation.

The Associated Press estimated that approximately 84% of ballots had been counted by November 11. Separate estimates indicated that tens of thousands of additional votes could still be added to the statewide totals.

Election officials expected another significant results update after the deadline for certain absentee ballots to arrive on Friday, November 13. Additional updates could also be released before the ranked-choice count.

The official ranked-choice tabulation is scheduled for November 18.

Until that process is completed, the figures showing Peltola ahead by 4,250 votes represent preliminary first-choice results rather than a certified election outcome.

Why the Alaska Senate race matters nationally

The contest has attracted national attention because control of the Senate will shape the legislative and political environment during the remainder of President Donald Trump’s term.

Democrats have already secured control of the Senate following the 2026 midterm elections, but the final number of seats held by each party remains important.

An Alaska victory for Peltola would expand the Democratic majority and strengthen the party’s position in a chamber responsible for confirming federal judges, approving presidential appointments and considering legislation.

A Sullivan victory would preserve the Republican senator’s seat and limit the size of the Democratic majority.

The result also carries significance for Alaska, where the senator represents the state on issues involving energy development, federal land management, fisheries, military installations, infrastructure and relations with Alaska Native communities.

Both parties have an interest in the outcome because the seat could influence the balance of power on committees and the Senate floor.

For Republicans, losing an incumbent senator in a state that has traditionally leaned Republican in federal elections would represent another difficult result from the 2026 election cycle.

For Democrats, Peltola’s performance demonstrates the party’s ability to compete in a state where statewide races can be shaped by local economic concerns, geography and the preferences of independent voters.

Peltola and Sullivan await the ranked-choice decision

The next major stage of the contest will be the official ranked-choice tabulation on November 18.

Until then, both campaigns must account for additional first-choice ballots and the possible redistribution of votes from candidates who do not finish among the final contenders.

Peltola currently has the stronger first-choice position, with a 4,250-vote advantage over Sullivan. Her lead has grown through successive vote updates, and preliminary analysis of available ballot rankings suggests that the incumbent may not be able to overcome it through transfers alone.

However, the final outcome cannot be declared until election officials complete the required counting and tabulation procedures.

The independent Dan J. Sullivan and Republican Gerald Heikes have both received enough first-choice votes to make their supporters’ rankings relevant to the final calculation. Yet those votes will be distributed according to individual voter preferences, not party assumptions or candidates’ names.

The Alaska Senate race therefore remains one of the most closely watched unresolved contests of the 2026 midterm elections.

Peltola has widened her lead, but the decisive question is whether that advantage will hold after the remaining ballots are counted and Alaska’s ranked-choice voting process is completed.

EXPLORE MORE:

Gina Hinojosa Faces Key Decision on Texas Border Security After Defeating Greg Abbott

Texas Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa faces an early test of her leadership as she prepares to take office: deciding what to do with Operation Lone Star, the multibillion-dollar border-security initiative established by outgoing Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.

Hinojosa’s victory over Abbott makes her the first Democratic governor of Texas since Ann Richards left office in January 1995. Her position on immigration enforcement could bring significant changes to the state’s approach to border security.

Abbott launched Operation Lone Star in 2021 as illegal border crossings increased during former President Joe Biden’s administration. The initiative expanded into a major state operation involving National Guard deployments, law-enforcement personnel and construction of barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Texas has spent more than $11 billion on the program, with more than 10,000 National Guard members participating in its operations.

Hinojosa Criticizes Operation Lone Star Spending

During her campaign, Hinojosa repeatedly criticized Operation Lone Star and voted against its original funding while serving in the Texas Legislature.

However, she has not explicitly promised to eliminate the entire initiative after becoming governor.

“As governor, I’ll put in the work to secure the border, not waste working Texans’ money on political theater,” Hinojosa said.

She has argued that some of the program’s expenditures have delivered questionable value to taxpayers. One area of criticism involves spending on prosecutions of migrants accused of trespassing, while public funds also support legal representation for defendants.

“Public safety shouldn’t be a political stunt,” Hinojosa said.

“I will spend the money it takes to keep our community safe, not for political theater,” she added.

Her comments suggest that she intends to maintain a border-security role for the state while reviewing how Texas spends money on enforcement.

Border Barriers and Federal Immigration Enforcement

Hinojosa has also opposed additional border-wall construction in the Big Bend region, questioning whether barriers in that area would meaningfully improve security.

She has criticized some Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations and aspects of Texas cooperation with federal immigration authorities. She previously accused Abbott of allowing the state to become a “staging ground” for federal enforcement activities she opposed.

At the same time, Hinojosa has acknowledged the significant decline in illegal border crossings since President Donald Trump returned to office. She has credited Trump administration policies with helping reduce illegal immigration.

That position adds complexity to the debate over Operation Lone Star. Hinojosa could argue that lower crossing numbers reduce the need for an extensive state deployment, while Republicans could contend that the existing operation helped establish deterrence and enforcement capacity.

Abbott launched the initiative under different border conditions, when encounters reached elevated levels during the Biden administration. Trump subsequently reversed several Biden-era immigration policies and expanded federal enforcement.

The federal government retains primary responsibility for immigration enforcement, although states can undertake certain border-related law-enforcement and infrastructure activities.

Republican Legislature Could Limit Changes

Hinojosa’s ability to overhaul Operation Lone Star will depend partly on negotiations with the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature.

Republicans retained control of the Texas Senate, creating a potential obstacle to major changes involving state spending, border policy and the program’s legal framework.

Border funding could therefore become an early point of disagreement between the incoming Democratic governor and Republican lawmakers.

Abbott’s approach placed Texas at the center of national immigration disputes. The state deployed troops and law-enforcement officers, installed razor wire, constructed barriers and transported migrants to Democratic-led cities elsewhere in the country.

Hinojosa’s election could mark a shift away from that confrontational state strategy, although the extent of any changes remains uncertain.

Affordability and Other Campaign Priorities

Scroll to Top