By SUZANNE DOWNING
For eight straight months, Alaskans were hit with a steady stream of attack ads against Alaska US Sen. Dan Sullivan.
The spending attack was sustained, with six-figure weekly buys that blanketed Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, and statewide digital platforms. You can hardly have missed them.
Democratic-aligned groups and Alaska-facing surrogates began pouring money into negative messaging in June, around the passage of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” act, and they kept it up through the fall and into winter.
Then, on Jan. 12, Mary Peltola announced she would challenge Sullivan for Senate. Shortly after that announcement, the outside spending began to taper dramatically, timing that raises questions.
In late November alone, 11 advertisements about Dan Sullivan ran statewide over a five-day stretch. Six were negative and five were positive. Total weekly spending jumped to roughly $116,000, up from about $77,000 the week prior.
Negative sponsors included Families Over Billionaires, Majority Forward, and The 907 Initiative. The negative ads outpaced the positive ones by roughly five to one in spending.
In mid-December, 13 ads ran over another weekly snapshot. Ten were negative, three were positive. Weekly spending again topped $100,000. Negative messaging dominated by about four to one. Connected TV and digital ads saturated the state during the holiday season. It’s a curious time to heavily fund a race where no Democratic challenger had officially declared. Ad buys like this during the Christmas holiday are not a great value because no one wants to hear that stuff at Christmas.
In the last digital report, negative expenditures were way down: total spending was $3,559.
Why was national Democratic money flowing into Alaska for months against an incumbent Republican, but without a named Democratic opponent in the race? In Washington, DC, the talk for months has been that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was intent on expanding the Senate map for 2026, putting as many Republican-held seats in play as possible.
Alaska was on that list and is always a cheap date. But Mary Peltola would not immediately commit. So they spent more and more.
Peltola brings name recognition, a pretty smile, national donor appeal, and demographic advantages that resonate with outside liberal fundraising networks. According to persistent DC chatter, Democratic groups were prepared to spend as much as $70 million on her behalf if she ran. That kind of commitment does not materialize overnight; it’s part of the big-map strategy.
At the same time, Peltola’s own campaign spending has followed a familiar national model. As we’ve reported at The Alaska Story, nearly all of her recent ads have been aimed out of state, focused on small-dollar donor acquisition. Roughly $1.3 million has gone out the door in digital advertising designed to bring more money in the door. It’s the modern conduit fundraising strategy: build a national donor base first, then leverage outside groups to amplify the effort.
Mary Peltola ad spend is nearly all aimed out of state, as she looks for donors
We will know more when the April 15 FEC report is released, covering activity through March 31.
But the broader pattern is visible: For months, Democratic-aligned groups spent heavily attacking Sullivan while no Democrat had been willing to enter the race. The spending intensified through late fall and December. Peltola jumped in Jan. 12. The pressure ended.
Schumer’s strategy has been to force Republicans to defend as many seats as possible. He secured candidates in other states. Alaska was the final chess piece on the board. Since Peltola’s announcement, there have been no major additional Democratic Senate recruitment surprises.
It appears that convincing her to run required sustained effort, both political and financial.
Now that she is in, the recruitment phase is over. There’s been a lull but the spending war is just beginning.
Suzanne Downing is founder and editor of The Alaska Story and is a longtime Alaskan.
Mary Peltola ad spend is nearly all aimed out of state, as she looks for donors
6 thoughts on “Did Schumer Democrats spend hundreds of thousands just to pressure Mary Peltola into Senate race?”
All Schumer had to do was promise that they would find a dozen male prospects for lonely Mary and a year’s supply of marijuana for her Bethel friends. Once again, the Democrats are desperate.
$$ coming your way, Dan.
I remember listening closely to one of the December ads about Dan Sullivan. EVERY statement in the ad was a LIE. Typical Chuckie Schumer.
I can’t figure out why it is legal to use the airwaves to lie about somebody nonstop. Everything those ads proposed was demonstratively false. At the very least, couldn’t Dan sue them for defamation?
They’re wasting lots of their money running those ads on Newsmax
Chuck, you are a disgrace to all political candidates in your party and other parties. If you, Chuck, didn’t offer money you’d have nothing to offer at all. This shows zero integrity, zero truth, zero candidates to run unless there is bribery in the name of power, control, and winning at all costs. This is not in the best interest of the people. The human compassion is gone from you Chuck. God still sees all. One day you get to explain just how you were helping people, as a servant elected official for the peoples best interest at heart.
Disgraceful. Blessings, W.
Wow. That startled me. I thought your missive was aimed at Chuck Clarke, who’s comment seemed rather innocent. But I see you must have intended to lambast Chuck U. Schumer. Whew!!
.
That said, Chuck U. has been a most despicable individual for over 30 years. He will secure the appropriate reward when he stands at the pearly gates.
.
Thank you for the story Suzanne!