Published July 22, 2026
Could Democratic control of the Senate be secured by two candidates without a “D” after their names?
High-profile independent candidacies in Nebraska and Montana are performing well in polls, lifting Democrats’ hopes of retaking control of the upper chamber in the midterms. Has Team Blue found a strategically savvy way to expand the Senate map into deeply red territory? Perhaps, but history suggests the gambit is highly likely to fail.
In Nebraska, independent Dan Osborn — who two years ago unexpectedly held Sen. Deb Fischer (R) to just a seven-percentage-point win (Donald Trump carried the state by 20 points) — is back to challenge Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts. In Montana, independent Seth Bodnar, a former University of Montana president, is seeking to succeed outgoing GOP senator Steve Daines. Kurt Alme, a former U.S. attorney for the state, is the Republican nominee.
The idea animating both independent efforts is that an outsider candidate unburdened by the Democratic label can win over far more independents and weakly affiliated Republicans than a more conventional Democrat ever could. The theory seems sound, but in practice it runs into two significant obstacles.
Click here to continue reading.
Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, is a globally recognized expert on American elections and policy as well as global populism.
