Alaska Senate candidate Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) questioned debate moderators regarding the preparation of his opponent, former Congresswoman Mary Peltola (D-AK), after observing her reading from notecards during a debate in Anchorage on Thursday night. Sullivan asked if the questions had been provided in advance, a claim the moderators denied.
The exchange occurred during the "Debate for the State," hosted by Alaska Public Media and Alaska's News Source. Peltola was seen glancing down at paper cards for several seconds at a time while answering early questions. Sullivan stated he was "just watching my opponent" after Peltola read off a card during her response.
What the Right Is Saying
Sen. Dan Sullivan challenged the debate format by asking moderators, "We weren't supposed to get these questions beforehand, were we?" When Alaska's News Source reporter Wil Courtney and Alaska Public Media chief editor Lori Townsend confirmed that no questions were provided in advance, Sullivan noted his observation of Peltola reading from notes.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) mocked Peltola's reliance on the notecards, with an NRSC official suggesting she was reading talking points written by "Lower 48 handlers." The Republican Party's research arm circulated a clip of Peltola looking at her notes while discussing Alaska's fishing industry. Sullivan later told reporters that he believed the moderators' assertion that no one saw the questions in advance, stating, "I'm not blaming you guys."
What the Left Is Saying
Mary Peltola responded to Sullivan's inquiry by stating she was simply better "prepared" for the debate. Her campaign and supporters have not publicly issued a statement disputing the moderators' confirmation that questions were not leaked, framing the incident as a matter of thorough preparation rather than an unfair advantage.
Peltola also addressed personal attacks launched by Sullivan during the debate, specifically regarding a New York Times report alleging that former staffers accused her of angry outbursts. Peltola described these claims as "outright fabrications or mass exaggerations." The tension between the candidates led moderators to warn that they would cut the microphones if cross-talk did not cease.
What the Numbers Show
Presidential debates typically prohibit prepared notes, allowing candidates only blank paper and a pen, though state and local debate rules vary. Alaska Public Media has not publicly posted its specific policy regarding the use of notes in this debate. Historical precedents for such controversies include the 2016 Democratic primary, where CNN cut ties with contributor Donna Brazile after hacked emails revealed she had tipped off the Clinton campaign about upcoming debate questions.
The debate environment was further complicated by a separate legal battle involving a second candidate named Dan Sullivan. Dan J. Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg, appeared on the November ballot alongside the incumbent Senator. The Alaska Division of Elections disqualified him, ruling his candidacy was not filed in "good faith," a decision supported by amicus briefs from 14 Republican-controlled states. However, Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews ruled the disqualification unconstitutional, stating that state law does not permit the removal of a candidate who meets the legal qualifications for office.
The Bottom Line
The incident highlights the ongoing tension in Alaska's Senate race between Sen. Dan Sullivan and Mary Peltola, extending beyond policy disagreements to procedural disputes and personal attacks. The question of debate preparation norms remains a point of contention, with Republicans framing Peltola's note usage as reliance on external handlers, while Peltola characterizes it as adequate preparation.
Voters will decide the seat in November, with the outcome potentially influenced by the unresolved legal status of the duplicate-name candidate, Dan J. Sullivan. The debate's heated exchanges, including threats to cut microphones due to cross-talk, suggest the campaign will remain contentious through the final weeks of the election cycle.