In the abstract, it might seem like a disaster for the Democratic Party to see some of its U.S. Senate nominees end their campaign just three months before Election Day. But in several instances, this is precisely what the party wants — and arguably needs — to advance its own interests.

Roll Call reported on the latest development in an unexpected and unusual electoral strategy.

The Democratic Senate nominee in South Dakota ended his campaign Tuesday following calls from party activists to exit the race and leave independent Brian Bengs as the main competitor against Republican Sen. Mike Rounds.

Julian Beaudion, a former state trooper, cited “extraordinary personal challenges,” including a house fire, financial struggles and “intimidating threats to drop out of this race,” as reasons for his decision.

Democrats looked at this race and made a straightforward calculus: South Dakota is such a reliably red state, a three-way contest between a Republican incumbent, a Democratic nominee and an independent would invariably lead to Rounds’ re-election. But a two-way contest between the GOP senator and an independent might create a competitive race in a state Republicans haven’t had to think much about.

With this in mind, Democratic officials took a rather obvious step and asked Beaudion, who won the party’s nomination fair and square, to step down voluntarily. This clears the way for Bengs, a Navy and Air Force veteran who’s previously run for office as a Democrat, to take on Rounds one-on-one.

Beaudion made little effort to hide his opposition to the plan as he grudgingly exited the race this week, in a move Bengs touted as a “patriotic decision” that “put South Dakota first.”

And while this was an important development in its own right, it’s all the more notable in light of the broader pattern.

Last week, for example, David Roth, the Democratic Senate nominee in Idaho, also ended his candidacy to clear a path for an independent candidate — Todd Achilles, a former Democratic state legislator and an Army veteran — to take on Republican Sen. Jim Risch in a traditionally GOP stronghold.

Roth’s move came on the heels of Cindy Burbank, the Democratic Senate nominee in Nebraska, also ending her campaign, which set the stage for a one-on-race between independent Dan Osborn and incumbent Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts. (Osborn ran a competitive race against Republican Sen. Deb Fischer two years ago, losing by only 7 points in the same cycle as Donald Trump won Nebraska by 21 points.)

Many Democrats are equally eager to execute the same plan in Montana, where independent Seth Bodnar is running against Republican Kurt Alme; but the Democratic nominee, Alani Bankhead, has so far insisted that she’ll remain in the race — she told The New York Times in June, “I am never dropping out. Ever. Ever” — a position Republicans desperately hope she maintains.

Time will tell whether Bankhead changes her mind before it’s too late, but the broader pattern is remarkable either way: It’s the first election cycle I can think of in which a major party tried to advance its interests by not running candidates in multiple Senate races.

The post In multiple Senate races, Democrats get creative, try to win by not running a candidate appeared first on MS NOW.

Author: Source Author

From MS Now.