Alaska reportedly discovers democracy becomes considerably more difficult when everybody is named Dan Sullivan
I have a simple question for the State of Alaska.
Will the real Dan Sullivan please stand up?
Actually, everybody sit down.
We’ll start over.
One at a time.
State your name clearly.
VERSE ONE: THERE APPEARS TO BE A DAN SULLIVAN PROBLEM
For years, Alaska voters lived relatively peaceful lives under the assumption that there was one politically relevant Dan Sullivan.
That was manageable.
You turned on the television.
Dan Sullivan.
Opened the newspaper.
Dan Sullivan.
Looked at the Senate ballot.
Dan Sullivan.
Nobody needed additional instructions.
Then along came another Sullivan.
Also Dan.
Technically Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., which certainly provides additional information, although not nearly enough information for somebody standing in a voting booth thinking:
Wait a goddamn minute.
Suddenly Alaska has stumbled into the democracy equivalent of a luggage carousel where two people own the same black Samsonite.
Will the real Dan Sullivan please stand up?
VERSE TWO: WE’RE GONNA HAVE A PROBLEM HERE
Apparently simply being named Dan Sullivan is now insufficient identifying information.
We’re going to need specifications.
Dan Sullivan No. 1: United States senator.
Dan Sullivan No. 2: Retired teacher.
Excellent.
Now we’re getting somewhere.
Perhaps Alaska election officials should simply attach increasingly specific descriptions until confusion becomes impossible.
DAN SULLIVAN
Current U.S. senator.
DAN SULLIVAN
Not the senator.
If that doesn’t work:
DAN SULLIVAN
The Dan Sullivan you’ve heard of.
DAN SULLIVAN
The Dan Sullivan who has also heard of Dan Sullivan.
And if voters remain confused:
DAN SULLIVAN
THIS ONE. SERIOUSLY.
DAN SULLIVAN
NO, THE OTHER FUCKING GUY.
Democracy shouldn’t require a troubleshooting manual.
VERSE THREE: Y’ALL ACT LIKE YOU’VE NEVER SEEN TWO DAN SULLIVANS BEFORE
Apparently America is surprised that two human beings might share a name.
This seems especially unreasonable considering we have spent 250 years naming approximately half our male population John, Bill, Bob, Jim, Mike, Steve, and Dan.
Eventually statistics were going to catch up with us.
The shocking part isn’t that America produced two Dan Sullivans.
The shocking part is that both Dan Sullivans ended up on the same goddamn Senate ballot.
That’s where probability stops being mathematics and starts drinking.
Somewhere an election official presumably opened the candidate paperwork, saw SULLIVAN, DAN, nodded, moved to the next application and saw SULLIVAN, DAN again.
At which point the only appropriate administrative response was:
“Goddammit.”
VERSE FOUR: WILL THE REAL DAN SULLIVAN PLEASE STAND UP?
Now we arrive at the central constitutional question.
Suppose both men stand up.
What then?
Sit down again?
Ask questions only the real Dan Sullivan would know?
“What committees are you on?”
One answers immediately.
Promising.
Then somebody objects that parliamentary trivia unfairly advantages incumbent Dan Sullivan.
Fine.
New question.
“Are you Dan Sullivan?”
“Yes.”
“Are YOU Dan Sullivan?”
“Yes.”
Shit.
We need a better system.
Maybe wristbands.
VERSE FIVE: PLEASE STAND UP, PLEASE STAND UP
Things have now reached the stage where America must adopt procedures normally reserved for kindergarten field trips.
Dan Sullivan gets a red name tag.
The other Dan Sullivan gets blue.
Election officials hold a roll call every morning.
“Dan Sullivan?”
“HERE.”
“Dan Sullivan?”
“ALSO HERE.”
“No, Senator Sullivan.”
“HERE.”
“Other Sullivan?”
“HERE.”
“Excellent. Nobody move.”
This is how constitutional republics collapse.
Not through dictatorship.
Not through invasion.
Administrative exhaustion caused by too many Dans.
VERSE SIX: MY PALMS ARE SWEATY AND THIS BALLOT IS HEAVY
Meanwhile I am standing in the voting booth attempting to fulfill my civic responsibility.
I was prepared for this.
I studied the candidates.
I researched the issues.
I carefully considered the future of Alaska and the nation.
Then I looked at the ballot.
Dan Sullivan.
Okay.
Then:
Dan Sullivan.
My palms became sweaty.
Knees weak.
Arms heavy.
There is evidence of Mom’s spaghetti.
Things deteriorated from there.
An election worker asks whether I’m okay.
“WHICH DAN?”
“Sir?”
“WHICH FUCKING DAN?”
Security is now watching me.
VERSE SEVEN: SOMEBODY BETTER CAPTURE THIS MOMENT
This is what civics textbooks never prepare you for.
They tell children that voting is straightforward.
Research the candidates.
Consider the issues.
Enter the voting booth.
Choose the person who best represents your interests.
Nobody mentions the possibility that the person you researched may have duplicated himself.
Therefore I propose an emergency amendment to American election law:
THE TOO MANY DANS ACT
Section 1:
No Senate race shall contain more than one Dan Sullivan.
Section 2:
If an additional Dan Sullivan wishes to run, he must temporarily select another name.
Acceptable substitutions include:
- Steve Sullivan
- Chuck Sullivan
- Other Dan
- Senator Dan
- Teacher Dan
- Dan II: The Sullivaning
Section 3:
Under no circumstances may a third Dan Sullivan enter the race.
That constitutes an emergency.
The National Guard will be notified.
FINAL VERSE: GUESS WHO’S BACK
And so Alaska marches bravely toward Election Day confronting a question the Framers somehow neglected to answer:
Which Dan Sullivan is Dan Sullivan?
Perhaps that is unfair.
Both men are Dan Sullivan.
That’s the fucking problem.
One can imagine historians looking back upon this election centuries from now and confidently explaining that American democracy faced many challenges during the early 21st century.
Polarization.
Disinformation.
Institutional distrust.
Two Dan Sullivans.
Future schoolchildren will naturally ask how voters distinguished them.
Their teacher will sigh.
“Nobody knows.”
And somewhere in Alaska, election officials will still be standing behind a folding table holding two clipboards and shouting into an increasingly irritated crowd:
“Would the real Dan Sullivan please stand up?”
Two men rise.
“Goddammit. Sit back down.”
EDITORIAL BOARD CORRECTION
An earlier version of this editorial may have implied that we successfully determined which Dan Sullivan was the real Dan Sullivan.
We have not.
Both Dan Sullivans remain Dan Sullivan.
The investigation continues.
