WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.700 Welcome in, everyone. And when I say everyone, 00:00:02.839 --> 00:00:05.040 I mean you. Yeah, exactly. Yes, you listening 00:00:05.040 --> 00:00:07.980 right now. We have custom tailored today's deep 00:00:07.980 --> 00:00:10.859 dive just for you. You know, we love taking a 00:00:10.859 --> 00:00:15.400 stack of research notes, raw data, and just mining 00:00:15.400 --> 00:00:18.219 it for those real gems of insight. Oh, absolutely. 00:00:18.460 --> 00:00:22.000 And today we are diving into a source that, well, 00:00:22.160 --> 00:00:24.699 on the surface, it might just look like a giant 00:00:24.699 --> 00:00:27.530 spreadsheet. We are looking at a comprehensive 00:00:27.530 --> 00:00:30.809 Wikipedia data set detailing the complete history 00:00:30.809 --> 00:00:33.390 of United States Senate elections in the state 00:00:33.390 --> 00:00:35.969 of Alaska. It's phenomenal data set, truly a 00:00:35.969 --> 00:00:38.710 masterclass in how raw numbers can, you know, 00:00:38.710 --> 00:00:41.170 tell an incredibly dramatic story. I couldn't 00:00:41.170 --> 00:00:42.950 agree more. Now, I know what you might be thinking. 00:00:43.070 --> 00:00:46.289 A chronological list of election returns. Isn't 00:00:46.289 --> 00:00:48.869 that just a bunch of dry historical math? Right. 00:00:48.929 --> 00:00:50.750 It sounds a bit dull at first. But trust me, 00:00:50.810 --> 00:00:53.130 this particular list is an absolute treasure 00:00:53.130 --> 00:00:56.049 trove of political wildcards. looking at expected 00:00:56.049 --> 00:00:58.310 party line votes we are talking about shocking 00:00:58.310 --> 00:01:00.810 down to the wire upsets that no one saw coming 00:01:00.810 --> 00:01:03.869 oh the upsets are wild we are looking at a legitimately 00:01:03.869 --> 00:01:07.430 historic write -in campaign that defied every 00:01:07.430 --> 00:01:10.409 conventional political odd and we're even digging 00:01:10.409 --> 00:01:13.030 into brand new voting mechanics that completely 00:01:13.030 --> 00:01:15.569 alter the fundamental rules of how an election 00:01:15.569 --> 00:01:19.349 is actually won it is uh it's anything but dry 00:01:19.799 --> 00:01:22.180 But before we jump into those numbers, I do need 00:01:22.180 --> 00:01:24.140 to establish some very important context for 00:01:24.140 --> 00:01:26.780 you, our listener. As we go through the source 00:01:26.780 --> 00:01:29.040 material, we are going to be discussing politically 00:01:29.040 --> 00:01:31.780 charged content. Always important to know. Definitely. 00:01:32.319 --> 00:01:35.019 The data we are analyzing involves the Democratic 00:01:35.019 --> 00:01:37.459 Party, the Republican Party, the Libertarian 00:01:37.459 --> 00:01:39.819 Party, the Green Party, and various independent 00:01:39.819 --> 00:01:43.000 candidates. I want to be absolutely clear right 00:01:43.000 --> 00:01:45.819 at the top that we are not endorsing any viewpoints, 00:01:45.959 --> 00:01:48.040 any political parties, or any of the candidates 00:01:48.040 --> 00:01:50.560 mentioned. Right. Our role here is strictly to 00:01:50.560 --> 00:01:53.260 act as impartial guides. We are simply reporting 00:01:53.260 --> 00:01:56.079 the factual data exactly as it is contained in 00:01:56.079 --> 00:01:57.920 the original source material. Perfectly said. 00:01:58.019 --> 00:02:00.739 We are just here for the math and the fascinating 00:02:00.739 --> 00:02:03.480 narrative those numbers reveal over time. Okay, 00:02:03.519 --> 00:02:05.819 let's unpack this. So to really understand the 00:02:05.819 --> 00:02:08.259 narrative arc in this data set, we have to look 00:02:08.259 --> 00:02:11.740 at Alaska's unique timeline. As we know, U .S. 00:02:11.780 --> 00:02:13.919 senators are divided into classes, and Alaska 00:02:13.919 --> 00:02:16.659 holds the Class 2 and Class 3 seats, serving 00:02:16.659 --> 00:02:19.300 those staggered six -year terms. Right. But because 00:02:19.300 --> 00:02:21.259 Alaska didn't officially join the union until 00:02:21.259 --> 00:02:24.680 1959, their timeline completely bypassed the 00:02:24.680 --> 00:02:27.599 era before the 17th Amendment. Right. The 1913 00:02:27.599 --> 00:02:30.020 Amendment, the one that mandated direct voter 00:02:30.020 --> 00:02:32.379 election of senators rather than letting state 00:02:32.379 --> 00:02:35.039 legislatures pick them. Exactly. So Alaska voters 00:02:35.039 --> 00:02:36.800 have literally always had their hands on the 00:02:36.800 --> 00:02:39.199 wheel. They never even knew the old system. They've 00:02:39.199 --> 00:02:41.360 been directly electing their senators from day 00:02:41.360 --> 00:02:44.419 one of statehood. And you see the intensity of 00:02:44.419 --> 00:02:46.300 that voter participation right out of the gate. 00:02:46.439 --> 00:02:48.340 If we look at the first wave of elections in 00:02:48.340 --> 00:02:51.379 1958, the initial baseline is set by the Democrats. 00:02:51.639 --> 00:02:54.280 Right. In the class two seat, Bob Bartlett wins. 00:02:54.479 --> 00:02:56.340 But it's the margin that stands out. He pulls 00:02:56.340 --> 00:02:59.439 in a massive 83 .83 percent of the vote. Wow. 00:02:59.780 --> 00:03:02.740 And over in the class three seat, Ernest Gruening 00:03:02.740 --> 00:03:06.599 wins with a closer but still decisive 52 .61 00:03:06.599 --> 00:03:08.620 percent. Hold on. Let's just pause on that first 00:03:08.620 --> 00:03:13.180 number. 83 .83 percent. Yeah. In a statewide 00:03:13.180 --> 00:03:15.939 federal election, that is an astronomical level 00:03:15.939 --> 00:03:19.180 of consensus. Usually anything over 55 percent 00:03:19.180 --> 00:03:21.219 is considered a pretty comfortable win. Oh, absolutely. 00:03:21.479 --> 00:03:23.719 To break 80 percent means you are essentially 00:03:23.719 --> 00:03:26.780 running unopposed by the general public standard. 00:03:27.219 --> 00:03:30.300 How long did that kind of dominance last? Well, 00:03:30.340 --> 00:03:33.020 what's fascinating here is how quickly the landscape 00:03:33.020 --> 00:03:35.780 shifts to give rise to what we can only call 00:03:35.780 --> 00:03:38.919 the titans of Alaskan politics. OK. Well, the 00:03:38.919 --> 00:03:42.319 Democrats set the very first baseline. The data 00:03:42.319 --> 00:03:45.060 set reveals two Republican names emerging that 00:03:45.060 --> 00:03:47.259 will go on to define these two Senate seats for 00:03:47.259 --> 00:03:51.240 decades. Ted Stevens in Class 2 and Frank Murkowski 00:03:51.240 --> 00:03:53.840 in Class 3. The big names. And the level of dominance 00:03:53.840 --> 00:03:56.479 they achieve makes that initial 1958 race look 00:03:56.479 --> 00:03:58.500 like a regular occurrence. I'm looking at this 00:03:58.500 --> 00:04:00.439 early era in the data set right now, and these 00:04:00.439 --> 00:04:02.659 victory margins for Stevens and Murkowski are 00:04:02.659 --> 00:04:05.300 just absurd. How safe were these seats, realistically? 00:04:05.719 --> 00:04:08.419 Incredibly safe. We are looking at an era of 00:04:08.419 --> 00:04:11.960 absolute, undeniable blowouts. Let's look at 00:04:11.960 --> 00:04:17.000 Ted Stevens. By 1972, he's winning with 77 .30 00:04:17.000 --> 00:04:19.620 % of the vote. That's huge. Over three quarters 00:04:19.620 --> 00:04:22.060 of the electorate agreeing on a single candidate. 00:04:22.279 --> 00:04:24.560 And surely that was his peak, right? Usually 00:04:24.560 --> 00:04:27.800 incumbent fatigue sets in after a couple of terms. 00:04:27.860 --> 00:04:29.620 People just want to change. You would think so, 00:04:29.740 --> 00:04:31.680 but the returns tell a completely different story. 00:04:32.220 --> 00:04:35.079 Fast forward 30 years later to his 2002 election. 00:04:35.300 --> 00:04:37.990 30 years later. Yeah. Ted Stevens actually improves 00:04:37.990 --> 00:04:42.529 his margin, securing 78 .17%. He pulled in nearly 00:04:42.529 --> 00:04:46.350 180 ,000 votes. That is staggering. A 30 -year 00:04:46.350 --> 00:04:48.569 career where your margins actually go up to near 00:04:48.569 --> 00:04:51.350 80%. It defies normal political gravity. And 00:04:51.350 --> 00:04:53.149 what about the Class 3 seat? Did Frank Murkowski 00:04:53.149 --> 00:04:55.430 have that same iron grip? He absolutely did. 00:04:55.529 --> 00:04:58.430 In his 1998 re -election campaign, Murkowski 00:04:58.430 --> 00:05:02.610 secured a massive 74 .49 % of the vote. I want 00:05:02.610 --> 00:05:04.949 you, the listener, to imagine for a second that 00:05:04.949 --> 00:05:06.910 you were living in Alaska during this era. You're 00:05:06.910 --> 00:05:09.269 watching election cycle after election cycle 00:05:09.269 --> 00:05:12.649 return these massive 70 plus percent victories 00:05:12.649 --> 00:05:16.069 for the same two people. The stability of these 00:05:16.069 --> 00:05:18.009 seats makes it seem like the political landscape 00:05:18.009 --> 00:05:21.110 is permanently set in stone. It must have felt 00:05:21.110 --> 00:05:24.250 like a complete political monolith. The idea 00:05:24.250 --> 00:05:27.069 of a competitive nail biting Senate race probably 00:05:27.069 --> 00:05:29.649 felt entirely foreign to those voters. Completely 00:05:29.649 --> 00:05:31.810 foreign. But as we come further down this data 00:05:31.810 --> 00:05:34.319 set. The predictability falls right off a cliff. 00:05:34.519 --> 00:05:36.420 Here's where it gets really interesting. Oh, 00:05:36.439 --> 00:05:38.939 yeah. We are going to look at the shifting tides, 00:05:38.959 --> 00:05:41.459 starting with the drama of the class two seat. 00:05:41.800 --> 00:05:45.000 So we just established that Ted Stevens is winning 00:05:45.000 --> 00:05:48.079 by 30, 40 or even 50 point margins all the way 00:05:48.079 --> 00:05:51.160 into 2002. Right. But then we hit the year 2008. 00:05:51.420 --> 00:05:54.279 The incumbent Republican Ted Stevens is up against 00:05:54.279 --> 00:05:57.339 a Democrat named Mark Begich. What exactly happens 00:05:57.339 --> 00:06:00.100 to that 78 percent safety net? It completely 00:06:00.100 --> 00:06:02.480 evaporates. The blowout era comes to a screeching 00:06:02.480 --> 00:06:05.379 halt. In 2008, Mark Begich actually manages to 00:06:05.379 --> 00:06:07.680 edge out Ted Stevens. Unbelievable. And the raw 00:06:07.680 --> 00:06:09.779 totals are breathtaking when you compare them 00:06:09.779 --> 00:06:13.220 to the previous decades. Begich brings in 151 00:06:13.220 --> 00:06:19.480 ,767 votes, which translates to 47 .77%. And 00:06:19.480 --> 00:06:24.259 Stevens? Stevens takes 147 ,814 votes. That's 00:06:24.259 --> 00:06:27.339 46 .52%. Wait, let me just do that math really 00:06:27.339 --> 00:06:29.660 quick. We are talking about a difference of less 00:06:29.660 --> 00:06:32.339 than 4 ,000 votes out of nearly 300 ,000 cast. 00:06:32.660 --> 00:06:35.860 A shift of just 4 ,000 votes completely flips 00:06:35.860 --> 00:06:38.079 a seat that was considered untouchable for decades. 00:06:38.339 --> 00:06:41.420 It is a razor -thin margin. It represents a seismic 00:06:41.420 --> 00:06:43.500 shock to the system. You have to remember, a 00:06:43.500 --> 00:06:45.519 shift like that doesn't just change the nameplate 00:06:45.519 --> 00:06:47.899 on the door. It completely shatters the illusion 00:06:47.899 --> 00:06:49.959 of the monolithic electorate we just talked about. 00:06:50.060 --> 00:06:52.120 But does the data set show that this was a permanent 00:06:52.120 --> 00:06:54.600 shift? Did the Democrats lock it down after that 00:06:54.600 --> 00:06:57.560 incredible 2008 upset? Not at all. Just as quickly 00:06:57.560 --> 00:06:59.579 as the pendulum swung toward the Democrats in 00:06:59.579 --> 00:07:02.019 2008, it swung right back in the very next cycle. 00:07:02.100 --> 00:07:05.279 Really? Yeah. In 2014, the incumbent Democrat, 00:07:05.519 --> 00:07:07.819 Mark Bigich, is challenged by Republican Dan 00:07:07.819 --> 00:07:10.100 Sullivan. And once again, it is incredibly close. 00:07:10.300 --> 00:07:13.660 Sullivan narrowly defeats Begich with 47 .96 00:07:13.660 --> 00:07:16.360 percent of the vote compared to Begich's 45 .83 00:07:16.360 --> 00:07:20.199 percent. Another absolute nail biter. The ping 00:07:20.199 --> 00:07:23.680 ponging here is wild. But the evolution of this 00:07:23.680 --> 00:07:25.779 class two seat doesn't stop with the two major 00:07:25.779 --> 00:07:28.139 parties, does it? No, it doesn't. Let's fast 00:07:28.139 --> 00:07:31.100 forward to the 2020 election. Dan Sullivan is 00:07:31.100 --> 00:07:34.160 the Republican incumbent. Does he face another 00:07:34.160 --> 00:07:37.500 fierce Democratic challenger? This is where the 00:07:37.500 --> 00:07:39.420 electorate really starts showing its complexity. 00:07:39.600 --> 00:07:42.500 In 2020, Dan Sullivan does manage to retain his 00:07:42.500 --> 00:07:47.319 seat, securing a solid 53 .90%. But his main 00:07:47.319 --> 00:07:49.699 opponent isn't a traditional Democrat. Right. 00:07:49.779 --> 00:07:52.319 His opponent is Al Gross, running as an independent. 00:07:52.860 --> 00:07:56.560 And Gross captures a very significant 41 .19 00:07:56.560 --> 00:07:58.939 % of the vote. Over two -fifths of the state 00:07:58.939 --> 00:08:01.180 backed an independent against a sitting incumbent. 00:08:01.519 --> 00:08:04.040 This is exactly why we tailor these deep dives 00:08:04.040 --> 00:08:06.240 for you, the listener. You want multiple perspectives, 00:08:06.540 --> 00:08:08.839 right? Exactly. Well, just look at how this one 00:08:08.839 --> 00:08:11.379 specific Senate seat demonstrates those rapidly 00:08:11.379 --> 00:08:14.180 shifting perspectives. Within just a few election 00:08:14.180 --> 00:08:16.699 cycles, we see the voters flip party control 00:08:16.699 --> 00:08:19.259 entirely, flip it right back, and then heavily 00:08:19.259 --> 00:08:22.160 back a candidate operating entirely outside the... 00:08:22.160 --> 00:08:24.000 traditional two party structure. It's a total 00:08:24.000 --> 00:08:26.319 transformation. It proves that no matter how 00:08:26.319 --> 00:08:29.860 entrenched a seat looks on paper, voter sentiment 00:08:29.860 --> 00:08:32.919 can pivot rapidly. If we connect this to the 00:08:32.919 --> 00:08:35.539 bigger picture, the drama we just outlined in 00:08:35.539 --> 00:08:38.279 the class two seat is really only half the story. 00:08:38.399 --> 00:08:40.299 Oh. I know where you're going with this. Because 00:08:40.299 --> 00:08:42.679 the wild ride of the class three seat, what we 00:08:42.679 --> 00:08:45.700 might call the Lisa Murkowski saga, is arguably 00:08:45.700 --> 00:08:48.139 even more extraordinary. Oh, absolutely. The 00:08:48.139 --> 00:08:50.159 class three seat is where this spreadsheet turns 00:08:50.159 --> 00:08:52.840 into an out and out thriller. Let's set a baseline 00:08:52.840 --> 00:08:56.740 for this saga. In 2004, Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, 00:08:57.019 --> 00:08:59.779 wins the class three seat. It's a tight race, 00:08:59.879 --> 00:09:02.179 quite different from Frank Murkowski's old 74 00:09:02.179 --> 00:09:05.559 percent blowouts. Right. She gets 38 .58 percent 00:09:05.559 --> 00:09:08.259 against Democrat Tony Knowles, who pulls in 45 00:09:08.259 --> 00:09:11.580 .55 percent. That squeaker sets the stage for 00:09:11.580 --> 00:09:14.080 the absolute chaos of 2010. The 2010 election 00:09:14.080 --> 00:09:16.620 is, without a doubt, the most shocking data point 00:09:16.620 --> 00:09:19.419 in this entire Wikipedia source. I am still amazed 00:09:19.419 --> 00:09:21.100 every time I look at these numbers. Walk us through 00:09:21.100 --> 00:09:22.659 exactly what happened, because the logistics 00:09:22.659 --> 00:09:25.820 alone are mind boggling. In 2010, the incumbent, 00:09:26.100 --> 00:09:28.799 Lisa Murkowski, actually loses. the Republican 00:09:28.799 --> 00:09:31.500 primary. She is not the official Republican nominee 00:09:31.500 --> 00:09:33.779 for the general election, but she doesn't drop 00:09:33.779 --> 00:09:37.379 out. Instead, she mounts a campaign in the general 00:09:37.379 --> 00:09:40.720 election as a write in candidate and she wins. 00:09:41.120 --> 00:09:42.700 Let's just talk about the physical mechanics 00:09:42.700 --> 00:09:44.779 of that for a second. She isn't on the ballot. 00:09:44.960 --> 00:09:47.100 People can't just check a box next to an R or 00:09:47.100 --> 00:09:50.100 a D. What are the raw totals look like for a 00:09:50.100 --> 00:09:52.620 successful write in at this level? The write 00:09:52.620 --> 00:09:54.980 in option, which was officially attributed to 00:09:54.980 --> 00:10:00.639 Lisa Murkowski, secured 92 ,931 votes. Incredible. 00:10:00.919 --> 00:10:04.940 That is 36 .08 percent of the total vote. She 00:10:04.940 --> 00:10:07.220 defeated the actual official Republican nominee, 00:10:07.399 --> 00:10:11.100 Joe Miller, who received 35 .27 percent. And 00:10:11.100 --> 00:10:13.120 the Democratic candidate, Scott McAdams, who 00:10:13.120 --> 00:10:16.240 took 23 .32 percent. That is just historic. Think 00:10:16.240 --> 00:10:18.259 about the friction involved in that process. 00:10:18.460 --> 00:10:21.460 Over 92 ,000 people had to bypass the printed. 00:10:21.549 --> 00:10:23.750 options on the ballot, remember to bring a pen 00:10:23.750 --> 00:10:26.269 and physically write out her name. And spell 00:10:26.269 --> 00:10:28.370 it right. Right. Spelling it correctly enough 00:10:28.370 --> 00:10:30.490 to be counted by the election officials. And 00:10:30.490 --> 00:10:32.389 she still beat the official candidate of her 00:10:32.389 --> 00:10:34.110 own party. That just doesn't happen in modern 00:10:34.110 --> 00:10:37.090 American politics. It is exceptionally rare. 00:10:37.529 --> 00:10:39.909 To beat the infrastructure of the major parties 00:10:39.909 --> 00:10:43.730 using a blank line on a piece of paper is a monumental 00:10:43.730 --> 00:10:47.129 logistical feat. But the saga doesn't end there. 00:10:47.309 --> 00:10:49.230 Of course it doesn't. Let's look at the 2016 00:10:49.230 --> 00:10:52.759 election. Murkowski is running again, and she 00:10:52.759 --> 00:10:57.340 secures the victory with 44 .36%. But take a 00:10:57.340 --> 00:10:59.740 look at who her runner -up is. I see it. It's 00:10:59.740 --> 00:11:02.419 Joe Miller again, the very guy she beat in 2010. 00:11:02.580 --> 00:11:04.799 But if you look at the ticket, he isn't running 00:11:04.799 --> 00:11:07.580 as a Republican this time. Correct. The tally 00:11:07.580 --> 00:11:10.620 for that year lists Joe Miller running as a libertarian. 00:11:11.120 --> 00:11:15.179 And he pulls in an impressive 29 .16 % of the 00:11:15.179 --> 00:11:17.639 vote. It's literally like a political sequel 00:11:17.639 --> 00:11:20.340 with a genre twist. He comes back, changes parties 00:11:20.340 --> 00:11:22.759 and still grabs nearly 30 percent of the electorate. 00:11:22.779 --> 00:11:25.220 It's wild. And just when you think the class 00:11:25.220 --> 00:11:27.379 three seat can't get any more complicated, we 00:11:27.379 --> 00:11:29.279 arrive at the most recent election listed in 00:11:29.279 --> 00:11:32.220 the source, which is 2022. And Alaska throws 00:11:32.220 --> 00:11:34.559 a massive structural curveball into the mix. 00:11:34.700 --> 00:11:37.480 How did the format change? In 2022, the state 00:11:37.480 --> 00:11:40.220 moved away from a simple plurality vote and utilized 00:11:40.220 --> 00:11:42.870 instant runoff voting. So instead of just picking 00:11:42.870 --> 00:11:45.190 one person, voters are ranking their choices. 00:11:45.389 --> 00:11:48.669 If no one gets a majority, the lowest vote getters 00:11:48.669 --> 00:11:51.450 are eliminated and their voters' second choices 00:11:51.450 --> 00:11:54.230 are distributed until someone crosses the 50 00:11:54.230 --> 00:11:56.409 percent threshold. Right. Ranked choice voting. 00:11:56.610 --> 00:11:59.509 So how does that mechanical change impact the 00:11:59.509 --> 00:12:02.149 final outcome based on the data set? It fundamentally 00:12:02.149 --> 00:12:04.940 changes who is left standing at the end. According 00:12:04.940 --> 00:12:06.740 to the spreadsheet, in the maximum round of this 00:12:06.740 --> 00:12:12.019 instant runoff, Lisa Murkowski wins with 53 .70%. 00:12:12.019 --> 00:12:14.919 But look at who she is facing in that final maximum 00:12:14.919 --> 00:12:17.570 round. Let me see. It's Kelly Chewbacca who gets 00:12:17.570 --> 00:12:21.210 46 .3%. Wait, Kelly Chewbacca is also a Republican? 00:12:21.529 --> 00:12:23.789 Yeah. So because of the instant runoff mechanism, 00:12:24.169 --> 00:12:26.309 the Democratic candidate and any third party 00:12:26.309 --> 00:12:28.570 candidates were eliminated in the earlier rounds, 00:12:28.730 --> 00:12:30.990 leaving two members of the exact same party facing 00:12:30.990 --> 00:12:33.289 off as the final two candidates for a U .S. Senate 00:12:33.289 --> 00:12:36.470 seat. That completely rewrites the binary Republican 00:12:36.470 --> 00:12:39.730 versus Democrat playbook. It really does. Which 00:12:39.730 --> 00:12:42.190 brings us to a fascinating macro trend in this 00:12:42.190 --> 00:12:45.200 entire data set. Throughout all of these cycles, 00:12:45.299 --> 00:12:47.360 across both the class two and class three seats, 00:12:47.500 --> 00:12:50.440 there is a recurring, undeniable theme. Let's 00:12:50.440 --> 00:12:53.039 hear it. Alaskan voters frequently support third 00:12:53.039 --> 00:12:55.779 party and independent candidates at notably high 00:12:55.779 --> 00:12:59.659 rates. It points to a distinct, deeply ingrained 00:12:59.659 --> 00:13:02.200 culture of political independence. So what does 00:13:02.200 --> 00:13:04.950 this all mean? It means these voters are consistently 00:13:04.950 --> 00:13:07.710 willing to look outside the traditional safe 00:13:07.710 --> 00:13:10.509 boxes. And the source gives us some incredibly 00:13:10.509 --> 00:13:13.429 quirky, surprising data points to back this up. 00:13:13.629 --> 00:13:17.309 Let's look at 1996 in the class two seat. OK. 00:13:17.570 --> 00:13:20.129 Ted Stevens wins handily, of course. But who 00:13:20.129 --> 00:13:22.330 came in second? A Green Party candidate named 00:13:22.330 --> 00:13:25.750 Jed Whitaker. He secured 12 .52 percent of the 00:13:25.750 --> 00:13:27.740 vote. And what about the Democrat in that race? 00:13:27.919 --> 00:13:29.799 The mainstream Democratic candidate, Theresa 00:13:29.799 --> 00:13:33.279 Obermeyer, only received 10 .34 percent. That 00:13:33.279 --> 00:13:35.720 is wild. The Green Party actually beat the mainstream 00:13:35.720 --> 00:13:38.120 Democrat. According to the numbers, yes. Usually 00:13:38.120 --> 00:13:40.340 a third party is thrilled just to get three or 00:13:40.340 --> 00:13:42.679 four percent of secure funding. To outpace a 00:13:42.679 --> 00:13:45.100 major legacy party is incredible. Does that happen 00:13:45.100 --> 00:13:47.299 anywhere else in this data set? It's definitely 00:13:47.299 --> 00:13:50.080 not an isolated incident of voters defying convention. 00:13:50.600 --> 00:13:53.299 If you jump over to the 1968 race for the class 00:13:53.299 --> 00:13:56.220 three seat. Democrat Mike Gravel wins the election. 00:13:56.820 --> 00:14:00.019 But the former incumbent, Ernest Gruening, mounted 00:14:00.019 --> 00:14:02.320 a write -in campaign of his own. Oh, wow. And 00:14:02.320 --> 00:14:05.600 he grabbed 17 .44 % of the vote. Almost a fifth 00:14:05.600 --> 00:14:09.159 of the state writing in a name. Exactly. Or consider 00:14:09.159 --> 00:14:12.320 that 2016 race we just discussed with Lisa Murkowski 00:14:12.320 --> 00:14:15.200 and the libertarian Joe Miller. In that same 00:14:15.200 --> 00:14:17.600 exact race, there was an independent candidate 00:14:17.600 --> 00:14:20.320 on the ballot named Margaret Stock. How did she 00:14:20.320 --> 00:14:23.659 do? She took 13 .23 % of the vote. So if you 00:14:23.659 --> 00:14:26.379 combine Miller and stock, you have almost 100 00:14:26.379 --> 00:14:28.919 ,000 votes in a single election going to the 00:14:28.919 --> 00:14:31.039 libertarian or independent. It is just staggering 00:14:31.039 --> 00:14:33.759 volume for non -major party candidates. This 00:14:33.759 --> 00:14:36.429 raises an important question. How does the traditional 00:14:36.429 --> 00:14:39.230 two -party system manage to effectively function 00:14:39.230 --> 00:14:41.970 in a state where the electorate is so clearly 00:14:41.970 --> 00:14:44.529 and consistently willing to color outside the 00:14:44.529 --> 00:14:46.289 lines? It's a great question. When you have Green 00:14:46.289 --> 00:14:49.190 Party candidates beating Democrats, libertarians 00:14:49.190 --> 00:14:52.070 taking nearly 30 percent of the vote, and independents 00:14:52.070 --> 00:14:54.669 pulling in over 40 percent in a modern election 00:14:54.669 --> 00:14:57.809 like Al Gross did in 2020, the typical binary 00:14:57.809 --> 00:15:00.149 assumptions of American politics essentially 00:15:00.149 --> 00:15:02.429 get thrown out the window. It really does force 00:15:02.429 --> 00:15:05.169 you to reevaluate what a safe seat actually means 00:15:05.169 --> 00:15:07.889 and what a journey this data has taken us on 00:15:07.889 --> 00:15:11.330 today. To recap for you, the listener, we started 00:15:11.330 --> 00:15:14.029 by looking at the massive, highly predictable 00:15:14.029 --> 00:15:16.529 victory margins of the early statehood days. 00:15:16.690 --> 00:15:19.350 The blowout era. Right. Titans like Bob Bartlett, 00:15:19.450 --> 00:15:21.870 Ted Stevens and Frank Murkowski locking down 00:15:21.870 --> 00:15:24.850 margins of 70, sometimes over 80 percent, making 00:15:24.850 --> 00:15:27.539 the state look like an immovable monolith. Then 00:15:27.539 --> 00:15:30.299 we swung right into the nail -biting, razor -thin 00:15:30.299 --> 00:15:32.720 Democratic and Republican flips of the 2000s 00:15:32.720 --> 00:15:35.220 where a seat could be lost by a mere 4 ,000 votes. 00:15:35.399 --> 00:15:38.580 Which changed everything. And finally, we culminated 00:15:38.580 --> 00:15:41.259 in the absolute wild west of the class three 00:15:41.259 --> 00:15:44.879 seat. Historic right in victories requiring tens 00:15:44.879 --> 00:15:47.100 of thousands of people to physically spell out 00:15:47.100 --> 00:15:49.960 a candidate's name and the introduction of instant 00:15:49.960 --> 00:15:52.899 runoff matchups that put two members of the exact 00:15:52.899 --> 00:15:55.639 same party against one another in the final round. 00:15:55.820 --> 00:15:57.559 Equate the evolution. And the best part about 00:15:57.559 --> 00:16:00.220 all of this, this data set is a living document. 00:16:00.519 --> 00:16:03.360 The math isn't finished. The next chapters are 00:16:03.360 --> 00:16:05.809 going to be written very soon. The source notes 00:16:05.809 --> 00:16:08.250 that the class two seat is up for election in 00:16:08.250 --> 00:16:10.950 2026 and the class three seat will be decided 00:16:10.950 --> 00:16:14.190 again in 2028. Before we wrap up, I want to leave 00:16:14.190 --> 00:16:16.470 you with a final lingering thought based purely 00:16:16.470 --> 00:16:18.649 on the text we've analyzed today. Go for it. 00:16:18.710 --> 00:16:20.649 When you look at how a state can fundamentally 00:16:20.649 --> 00:16:23.429 change the mechanics of its elections, like Alaska 00:16:23.429 --> 00:16:25.970 adopting that instant runoff voting, where the 00:16:25.970 --> 00:16:28.750 math naturally eliminates certain factions until 00:16:28.750 --> 00:16:31.470 two members of the exact same party end up as 00:16:31.470 --> 00:16:34.200 the final choices on the ballot. You have to 00:16:34.200 --> 00:16:37.039 wonder how the literal rules of the game change 00:16:37.039 --> 00:16:39.980 the type of leaders that emerge. That's fascinating. 00:16:40.320 --> 00:16:43.620 We spend so much time analyzing voter ideology, 00:16:43.919 --> 00:16:46.100 tracking the shifting sentiments of Democrats 00:16:46.100 --> 00:16:48.899 and Republicans. But does the mathematical mechanism 00:16:48.899 --> 00:16:51.840 of voting matter just as much as the ideology 00:16:51.840 --> 00:16:54.659 of the voters themselves? It's something to deeply 00:16:54.659 --> 00:16:57.620 consider the next time you cast a ballot, wherever 00:16:57.620 --> 00:17:00.019 you are. A perfect thought -provoking question 00:17:00.019 --> 00:17:01.899 to leave off on. Thank you so much for joining 00:17:01.899 --> 00:17:04.119 us on this deep dive. We hope you enjoyed exploring 00:17:04.119 --> 00:17:06.200 the fascinating numbers, upsets, and logistics 00:17:06.200 --> 00:17:09.140 behind Alaska's Senate history. Keep being curious, 00:17:09.380 --> 00:17:11.539 keep questioning the data around you, and we 00:17:11.539 --> 00:17:12.440 will see you next time.