Democratic Senate Candidates Pursue a New Strategy in Rural States

 

Democratic Senate Candidates Pursue a New Strategy in Rural States: Dropping Out

Facing long odds in deep-red states, Democratic Senate nominees in Nebraska and Idaho have withdrawn from their races to clear the field for independent candidates. Here's how the strategy works and where it could spread next.

An Unusual Strategy: Winning by Stepping Aside

In a handful of the most Republican states in the country, national Democrats are trying something they rarely do: encouraging their own nominees to quit the race. Facing what party officials view as near-impossible odds in deep-red Senate contests, Democrats have begun clearing the field for independent candidates instead — betting that a one-on-one matchup against the Republican incumbent gives the opposition a better shot than a traditional three-way race ever could.

The approach has already played out in two states, with pressure mounting for it to spread to at least two more before the 2026 midterms.

Nebraska: Where the Strategy Started

The blueprint took shape first in Nebraska, where Democratic nominee Cindy Burbank withdrew from the Senate race and had her name removed from the ballot, clearing a direct path for independent candidate Dan Osborn to face Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts one-on-one. In a video message announcing her decision, Burbank told voters she had looked at the numbers and concluded she wouldn't be their next senator, framing the move as being about ensuring voters get real representation rather than a symbolic candidacy.

The move builds on real momentum: Osborn came within roughly 7 percentage points of unseating Republican Sen. Deb Fischer in 2024, even as Donald Trump carried the state by more than 20 points in the presidential race that same year. A Democrat hasn't won a Nebraska Senate seat since 2006, which is a large part of why party leaders now see backing an independent, rather than a Democrat, as their more realistic path to competing at all.

Nebraska's state Democratic Party has been explicit about the strategy going forward, with a spokesperson saying the party would back the broader coalition of Democrats, Republicans, and independents supporting Osborn rather than field a replacement nominee.

Idaho Follows the Same Playbook

Idaho became the second state to adopt the approach when Democratic nominee David Roth announced he was ending his campaign against longtime Republican Sen. Jim Risch, who is seeking a fourth term. In his statement, Roth said the decision came after considerable thought and conversations with his family and supporters, and that he wanted to focus his efforts where he felt he could have a larger impact.

Roth's exit leaves independent candidate Todd Achilles, a former Democratic state legislator and Army veteran, as the main challenger to Risch. Achilles has positioned himself explicitly as a candidate for voters tired of straight partisan politics, describing the core divide he sees in the race as being between those with power and everyone else, rather than between the traditional left and right. Idaho hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1974, and Trump carried the state by more than 35 points in 2024 — numbers that help explain why Idaho Democrats feel an independent candidate has a better shot than one carrying the Democratic label.

Not everyone in the state has embraced the shift quietly, however. An anti-abortion pastor who lost the Democratic primary to Roth has filed suit seeking to force state Democrats to name a replacement nominee rather than leave the race to Achilles alone.

Montana and South Dakota: Where the Pressure Is Building Next

Democratic leaders are now working to replicate the approach in two more states. In Montana, national and state party figures are calling on nominee Alani Bankhead to step aside so independent candidate Seth Bodnar can run one-on-one against Republican nominee Kurt Alme. In South Dakota, some Democratic officials have reportedly gone as far as discussing hiring a professional mediator to help persuade their own nominee to consider ending his campaign.

Unlike in Nebraska, where Burbank pledged during her primary campaign to eventually drop out, coordination in Montana and South Dakota has so far been less clean, with party officials working case by case to build consensus around the strategy rather than having it locked in from the start.

Why Democrats Think This Could Work

The core logic behind the strategy is straightforward: in states where the Democratic brand itself is a significant liability, a candidate without a "D" next to their name may be able to attract Republican and independent voters who would never consider backing an actual Democrat, even one they otherwise agree with on the issues.

Democratic strategists have also framed the approach as a low-risk bet. Even if the independent candidates ultimately lose, the argument goes, forcing Republicans into genuinely competitive one-on-one races could pressure the GOP into spending money defending seats it would otherwise have taken for granted — resources that might not be available for other, more competitive races elsewhere in the country.

The tactic isn't limited to the Senate, either. It has already extended to House races this cycle, including in Alaska, where Democrat Matt Schultz dropped out of the state's at-large House race to clear the way for independent candidate Bill Hill.

The Risks and Criticism

The strategy isn't without real downsides for Democrats. Backing an independent means giving up any guarantee of a party-line vote if that candidate wins and heads to Washington — a meaningful trade-off for a party trying to rebuild a Senate majority. Republican officials have also pushed back hard on the framing of these candidates as truly independent, with the National Republican Senatorial Committee explicitly referring to Osborn as a Democrat in public statements, arguing the strategy amounts to Democrats trying to disguise their own candidates rather than genuinely stepping aside.

What to Watch Next

• Whether Montana's Alani Bankhead and South Dakota's Democratic nominee ultimately follow Nebraska and Idaho's lead
• How Republican incumbents and national GOP groups adjust their spending in response to one-on-one races
• Whether independent candidates like Osborn and Achilles can translate the strategy into actual general-election wins, something Osborn was unable to do in his first run in 2024
• Ongoing legal challenges, like the Idaho lawsuit, that could complicate the strategy's rollout in other states

The Bottom Line

Democrats' willingness to step back from their own nominees reflects just how difficult the political map looks for the party in rural, deeply red states heading into the 2026 midterms. Whether this experiment in strategic withdrawal actually flips any of these seats remains to be seen, but the approach itself marks a notable shift in how national Democrats are thinking about competing — and possibly winning — in territory the party has largely written off in recent election cycles.