Nebraska Democrats Court Senate Candidate to Help Another Candidate Win
Nebraska Democrats court pharmacy technician Cindy Burbank to win the primary and then drop out, allowing independent Dan Osborn a one-on-one race against Republican Pete Ricketts while blocking Trump-supporting pastor William Forbes, whom Democrats allege is a Republican plant.
Objective Facts
Democrat Cindy Burbank is running for Senate in Nebraska with a campaign focused not on herself but on independent Dan Osborn, who is running to defeat Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts, making the Democratic primary one of the year's strangest races as Burbank runs largely to block her opponent William Forbes. Democrats argue Forbes, a Trump-supporting, abortion-opposing pastor from rural Nebraska, is a plant who aims to win the Democratic line to siphon votes away from Osborn, a Navy veteran and union leader. Burbank told The New York Times she planned to drop out if Osborn collects enough signatures to make the ballot independently, saying she would drop out once it became obvious she could not win in November. Following a complaint from the state Republican Party, Nebraska's GOP secretary of state attempted to block Burbank from the ballot as not a "good faith candidate," but the state Supreme Court reversed this decision. Osborn came within 7 percentage points of defeating the state's other Republican senator in 2024, despite Trump winning Nebraska by more than 20 points.
Left-Leaning Perspective
The American Prospect, in an article by Ian Ward, reported that pharmacy technician Cindy Burbank entered the race to defeat Forbes, the "Pete Ricketts stooge," and portrayed Republicans' attempt to remove Burbank as an anti-democratic effort that was properly reversed by the Nebraska Supreme Court, which found the secretary of state had made his objection too late. The Prospect quoted Executive Director Precious McKesson saying the party has never done "so much mail this early in a primary," and noted that McKesson wanted to "make sure that working people have a seat at the table and working-class people have someone who's their advocate," while party chair Jane Kleeb endorsed Osborn last year. McKesson framed the race as part of a broader "affordability crisis" narrative, noting that a former Union Pacific railroad employee heading the Nebraska AFL-CIO said "Osborn has inspired" three union members to run for state legislature in 2028.
Right-Leaning Perspective
The Federalist reported that the National Republican Senatorial Committee's Regional Press Secretary Nick Puglia stated Osborn "wants to import the radical left's agenda into Nebraska," and characterized Burbank's strategy as "just the latest example of Democrats exploiting elections and voters to consolidate power," noting Osborn received contributions from Warren and worked with Fight Agency, described as collaborating with leftists like Bernie Sanders and Zohran Mamdani. Townhall reported that Osborn "has bought into the game" and "begged Democrat primary voters to back Burbank" while the Nebraska Democratic Party "gone all-in on this shady strategy." The Federalist also emphasized that Burbank was represented by Marc Elias' law firm to get back on the ballot, and that Osborn's campaign has paid the same firm nearly $50,000 for legal services, "demonstrating the firm's professional connection to both Burbank and Osborn's campaigns."
Deep Dive
The Nebraska Democratic primary has become a high-stakes test of an unconventional Democratic strategy: skipping their own primary to back independent Dan Osborn in an effort to defeat incumbent Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts, after William Forbes, a 79-year-old Trump-voting pastor, entered the Democratic primary just before the filing deadline in early March, upending the carefully coordinated plan. To oppose Forbes, Cindy Burbank also filed in the primary on the last day and has been explicit about her intentions—not running to win but to stop Forbes—but her candor nearly cost her a spot on the ballot after Nebraska's Republican secretary of state removed her, ruling she was not a "good-faith" candidate, though the Nebraska Supreme Court ultimately ordered her reinstated. Democrats believe Osborn gives them their best shot at unseating Ricketts, but they contend that Forbes threatens to unravel that strategy, with Party Chair Jane Kleeb arguing "If it's a head-to-head, (Republicans) need someone to peel off the vote." What each perspective gets right: The Democratic argument has merit that courting Burbank represents a legitimate primary strategy, with transparency about her intentions and an independent who appeals beyond traditional Democratic margins. The Republican critique correctly identifies that the strategy involves a candidate explicitly planning not to serve if elected, which does raise genuine questions about the purpose of primary elections. What they leave out: Left-leaning coverage largely downplays the philosophical tension of running a candidate without intention to hold office, while right-wing coverage skips over Osborn's genuine competitive strength (within 7 points of defeating an incumbent in 2024) that makes him arguably Democrats' strongest general election option. Looking ahead, Osborn, not on the ballot Tuesday since he's running as an independent, has raised over $3.8 million and faces an August 3 deadline to collect enough signatures to be on the general election ballot, while Ricketts has raised over $4.8 million.