Mary Peltola, the Alaska Democrat, responded to the New York Times report on the alleged "Decoy Dan" spoiler-candidate scheme by attacking the newspaper, calling the story "all stuff to sell newspapers" and "just another distraction."
RedState, the conservative outlet with 370,000 followers on X, flagged the response Wednesday night as a "tone-deaf" answer to revelations that have put the Alaska Senate race under a national spotlight in its final week.
According to the Times reporting, a staffer for Peltola received unusual instructions from top campaign aides in the summer of 2025: find as many people named Dan Sullivan in Alaska as possible. The staffer combed through voter records and produced a list of Dan Sullivans from across the state. The Times reported, based on interviews, text messages and documents prepared for a potential lawsuit against the campaign, that Peltola's team worked with people trying to recruit Dan J. Sullivan to run for Senate — and that the effort was broader than that single recruitment, with the group working to coax other would-be spoilers into the race to dilute the incumbent's support.
Separate coverage of the same subject reported that the Times detailed secret efforts by the Peltola campaign, its lawyers and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to recruit Dan J. Petersburg Sullivan of Petersburg and other challengers, aiming to draw votes away from Republican incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan.
Peltola's campaign has repeatedly denied any involvement in Dan J. Sullivan's candidacy.
Asked about the Times story, Peltola went after the paper rather than the substance of the allegations. "This is all stuff to sell newspapers," she said, according to a post from Matt Tunseth. "This is all stuff to get subscriptions. Nobody at the New York Times cares about affordability in Alaska. This is just another distraction."
RedState's Ward Clark has been covering the Alaska story closely, and the outlet's Sister Toldjah wrote that between the Times reporting and news that the Justice Department is in the midst of what has been described as an "aggressive criminal investigation" running for several months into the Decoy Dan scheme — with multiple grand jury subpoenas reportedly expected soon — Peltola "has her hands full."
RedState's headline summarized its verdict on the response bluntly: "Yikes: Peltola Makes Things Worse for Herself With Tone-Deaf Response to NYT's Decoy Dan Revelations." The outlet framed the exchange as a candidate deflecting from the specifics of the reporting rather than answering them.
The story has spread across conservative media outlets, with RedState and other coverage carrying the allegations and Peltola's response to a national audience. The conservative press has focused on the mechanics described in the Times account — the instructions to a campaign staffer, the list of Dan Sullivans compiled from voter records, and the claim that the recruitment effort extended to multiple potential spoiler candidates.
Peltola's answer did not address any of those specifics. Instead, it characterized the reporting as a circulation ploy and asserted that the Times does not care about affordability in Alaska — a charge about the newspaper's motives rather than a denial of the underlying allegations.
The timing is notable: the story landed in the final week before the 2026 midterms, with RedState noting that "after next week, Sen. Dan Sullivan can ensure that she has a lot more time on her hands to focus on it." The outlet has also urged readers to help it continue reporting on what it calls the Democrats' radicalism as the election approaches.
Next News Network could not independently verify the allegations reported by the Times or the existence and scope of the Justice Department investigation described in the coverage.
Our Take
Peltola had one clean play when the Times story broke: answer the specifics, deny what she says is false, and let the voters judge. Instead she reached for the oldest move in the Democratic playbook — shoot the messenger, call it a subscription drive, and hope the cameras move on. That works on cable panels. It does not work with Alaska voters who just learned that a staffer was allegedly told to round up every Dan Sullivan in the state.
The tell is what she did not say. There was no denial of the list, no explanation of the instructions from top campaign aides, no answer to the Times' interviews and text messages. There was only a complaint about newspaper economics. When a candidate cannot speak to the facts, she speaks about the outlet reporting them — and conservatives should be clear-eyed about what that silence signals a week before an election.
The Justice Department investigation, if the reporting holds up, takes this from a bad news cycle to a legal problem. Grand jury subpoenas are not newspaper promotions. Alaskans deserve a senator who answers questions about ballot schemes with facts, not with a subscription line.
