Alaska, Part 1: Not Your Typical Red State

The state's unique political makeup -- unlike any other in the nation -- defies the standard rural conservative narrative.

Alaska, a state in the extreme northwest of the United States, is geographically unique, positioned further north and west than any other state, including Washington and even Hawaii.

But Alaska isn't just defined by its location.

Politically, what's interesting about the Last Frontier is that while it fits the standard current prevailing archetype of a small, rural Trump-loving state, it's actually much more idiosyncratic.

The Political Status Quo

In the 2020 election, Alaska supported Trump by a 10-point margin — a number that might seem sizable but is relatively modest compared to many other states, especially compared to its similarly-sized counterparts in the Mountain West.

Take the Dakotas, for instance. Both states have around the same number of residents — between 500,000 and 100,000 — and similar population demographics: largely white, but with a significant Native American tribal presence. However, compared to Alaska, the Dakotas are far more conservative: in 2020, South Dakota and North Dakota supported Trump by 35.1% and 33.4% margins, respectively. In other words, Alaska voted nearly 25 points to the left of the Dakotas. To put this into perspective, New York voted 25 points to the left of North Carolina in the election.

Interestingly, Alaska has only voted for a Democrat once since joining the Union in 1960: the 1964 election, when Alaskans backed Lyndon B. Johnson in his landslide national victory in every state outside of the Deep South. Since then, however, Alaska has consistently voted Republican in presidential elections, though it has occasionally shown signs of Democratic traction over the past few decades — and this trend has only accelerated in the 21st century.

Breaking Down the Results, Geographically

Looking at an electoral map of Alaska from the 2020 election, you’ll see an interesting pattern: most of the state’s boroughs (equivalent to counties in most other states) appear blue. This contrasts sharply with states like Wisconsin, where small, densely populated urban blue pockets were sufficient to win Biden the state amid large red rural areas. In fact, this trend is reflected across nearly every other state in the nation: in 2020, Donald Trump won 2497 counties to Biden’s 477.

In Alaska, by contrast, the Democratic base of support is spread across rural areas, giving the state an unusual rural Democratic presence.

However, this comes with a tradeoff: just like Republican support among rural Wisconsinites failed to overcome bastions of Democratic voters in Milwaukee, Madison, and the latter’s suburbs, the coalition of Democrats across rural Alaska — namely native Alaskan tribes — has proven insufficient in overcoming Republican margins in urban and suburban areas, as well as non-native rural areas.

Alaska’s Journey from Solid Red to Magenta

Before the 21st century, and through the early 2000's, Alaska was undoubtedly a solidly Republican state. Between 1972 and 2004, the state supported Republicans by 20 to 30%, on average. During this time, no Democrat managed to win more than 40% of the state’s voters.

During these four decades, Alaska actually was politically indistinguishable from the Mountain West states.

By 2008, all hope seemed lost for Alaskan Democrats. Despite carrying 365 electoral votes, winning the national popular vote by 7.2%, and tightening the margins in Mountain West states like Montana (R+2.4) and South Dakota (R+8.4), Barack Obama lost Alaska by an enormous 21.5%.¹

Yet, since that election, Republicans’ grip on Alaskan politics has loosened just a bit. In 2012, Republicans won a noticeably smaller 18% victory in Alaska — despite the nationwide popular vote shifting nearly 4 points to the right. In 2016, Trump’s performance slipped further compared to Romney’s and McCain’s, winning by 14.7%. His relatively-poor showing was likely caused by weakness among moderate white voters — a significant force in areas like Anchorage and its surrounding suburbs — and his opponent Hillary Clinton’s strong enthusiasm and support from Native voters.

By 2020, Democrats hit a high watermark in Alaska, as Joe Biden continued the state’s leftward trend by building on Hillary Clinton’s gains. Biden lost the state by 10% and won 44.77% of Alaskans — a level of support Democrats had not attained since 1964, when they last won the state.

Alaska’s Demographic DNA

One reason — arguably the main one — that Alaska is not as predictably Republican as other rural states lies in its demographic makeup. Native Alaskans represent 15.7% of the state’s electorate. In line with most Native American tribes across the United States — take the Navajo Nation in Arizona and the Pueblo Tribe in New Mexico, for instance — Native Alaskans lean strongly Democratic. The Inupiat People of the North Slope Borough, the Yup’ik People of the Bethel Census Area, and the Haida Peoples of Southeast Alaska all supported Biden by decisive margins in 2020

While their 15% portion of the total population — equivalent to roughly 1/7th — might seem small, they aren’t the only non-white groups in Alaska. 6.7% of Alaskans identify as Asian, 3.7% as Black, 1.7% as Pacific Islander, 5.3% as at-least partially Hispanic, 8.2% as multiracial, and 1.7% as an other non-white race. Added up, these groups comprise over 40% of the Alaskan population, one of the largest minority populations of any state (as a percent of the total populace). While there are still many white, rural Republican voters in Alaska, they make up a smaller proportion of the electorate compared to other rural areas in the U.S.

Alaska also has one of the younger populations in the nation, with a large proportion of youth voters who tend to reside in urban areas like Anchorage, the state’s largest city and home to the aptly-named University of Alaska, Anchorage; Fairbanks, where U-Alaska Fairbanks is located; and Juneau, the state capitol.

Young voters between the ages of 18 and 29 tend to support Democrats by wide margins in national elections, and there’s no reason to doubt that Alaskan youngsters follow this trend. Assuming up-and-coming generations of voters continue this leftward ideological shift, the future bodes well for Democrats.

However, let’s not forget about a crucial summary data: geography. Looking at the 2020 New York Times exit polls, Alaska’s geographic ideological composition is — to no one’s surprise — extremely unique. Normally, Democrats rely heavily on urban support to counterbalance large swaths of conservative rural voters, but in Alaska, they won these areas narrowly by 51%-47%. Considering the historically-Republican leanings of Anchorage — Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the city was a first for Democrats since 1964 — these numbers shouldn’t come off as a surprise.

Nationally, suburban voters have undergone a notable leftward shift during the Trump Era, but in Alaska, this trend seems all but nonexistant: in 2020, Trump won these voters by 25%.

Finally, onto the rural areas. The New York Times’ exit polls break down rurals into two categories: rural and small-town. In Alaska, this has yielded interesting results: while Trump won rural voters 61%-37%, he actually lost small-town voters 46%-50%. This discrepancy was rarely seen among most other states, and it’s unclear why the difference is so pronounced in Alaska.

Perhaps students in college towns classified their residences small-town? Maybe Native Alaskans used this term to describe themselves and the areas in which they reside?

Whatever the case, Alaska’s rural (both ‘rural’ and ‘small-town’) population, which accounts for nearly half of its entire vote, is not monolithic — which as an important component to Democrats’ ability to stay afloat and even build support in the Last Frontier.

Federal Subsidies and Government Support

Another interesting aspect of Alaska’s politics is its reliance on federal subsidies. Due to its extremely remote location, harsh climate, and sparse population (it’s the least-densely populated state in the nation!), Alaska receives heavy federal investment in the form of public services grants for its limited road network and vast forested areas, federal programs such as Medicaid and the Indian Health Service, and energy-friendly policies and subsidies supporting Alaska’s heavily oil- and natural resource-dependent economy. Oil-drilling policy is one the prime legislative items on Alaskans’ agenda, with the state’s split congressional delegation uniformly supporting these policies. As proof: Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola co-sponsored the Alaska’s Right to Produce Act of 2023, which reversed the Biden administration's restrictions on oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

While Alaskans generally support smaller government, they do recognize the benefits of federal support in their everyday lives, opening the door to greater receptivity to Democratic policies that emphasize government involvement.

But while Alaska’s need-based relationship with federal funds puts it at odds with traditional Republican ideals of limited government, Trump’s populist approach — along with Democrats’ embrace of renewable, climate-friendly energy production — has blurred the lines around this ideological tension in recent years. That being said, voters tend to favor Democrats when it comes to healthcare policy. Republican leaders — including Trump himself, with his failed American Health Care Act — have sought to cut down or outright repeal Medicaid and Medicare in favor of private healthcare.

All in all, it’s difficult to say whether the federal issue significantly benefits Democrats any more than it does Republicans, given that both parties support various facets of federal support for the state. However, it certainly differentiates Alaska from the more explicitly anti-big-government, liberation-leaning states of the Mountain West.

Alaska’s Ideological Secularism and Political Modernism

In addition, Alaska is a relatively secular state compared to other rural states, such as those in the South and the Mountain West, where religious conservatism often drives social policy. Alaskans, by contrast, are more likely to be nonreligious, which translates into greater social liberalism on issues such as abortion. A majority of Alaskans are pro-choice, whereas in other rural states, Republican voters are more uniformly anti-choice. This secularism may make Alaskans friendlier to many Democratic agendas in the state.

Trump-Era Extremism and Alaska’s Response

The Trump era has underscored Alaska’s relative ideological modernism. Across the U.S., Trump-backed candidates have often succeeded in Republican primaries, only to face challenges in general elections due to their extreme policies. This trend is visible in Alaska as well, where voters have shown resistance to extreme Republican candidates.

An obvious example would be in August 2022, when former Governor Sarah Palin, who had been as conservative as Trump both in rhetoric and policy, lost the House election against Democrat Mary Peltola. This was an astonishing victory for Democrats, not only because the state hadn't been expected to go Democratic, but because Alaska only has one House seat, making this essentially a statewide victory. Peltola’s win signaled Alaskans’ preference for moderation over extreme partisanship.

In another telling example, in another example, Senator Lisa Murkowski, a moderate Republican who angered much of the GOP base by voting to impeach Trump in 2021 and for generally being pro-choice, won re-election despite facing Trump-endorsed challenger Kelly Tshibaka. Polls showed Tshibaka as a strong contender, yet she lost by over five points. This outcome underscores Alaska’s resistance to extreme partisanship, with voters favoring Murkowski’s moderate approach over Tshibaka’s far-right alignment.

Down-Ballot Trends in Alaska: 2014 and 2018

Alaska’s electoral history beyond presidential races further highlights its complex political identity. While still the minority party in the state, Democrats have actually won some victories: Not only was there the recent House election in 2022 where Peltola won, but in 2014, during a Republican-leaning election year, independent Bill Walker won the governorship with Democratic support. Walker did support a fair amount of Republican policy positions, like being pro-gun, but he accepted Democrats’ backing - and his win demonstrates Alaska’s openness to candidates who don’t fully align with traditional party lines.

In that same year of 2014, which, by the way, was a very Republican-leaning year, the general ballot was around Republican plus one or plus two. Compared to two years prior in 2012, when Obama won the general election by nearly four points, Democratic incumbent Mark Begich in the Senate, who had been elected in 2008 against Republican incumbent Ted Stevens (who was a seven-term senator indicted for a felony in a corruption scandal), was running for re-election.

Just looking at the state's baseline in 2014, you would assume that Mark Begich was a sitting duck, but he faced a respectable Republican challenger in Dan Sullivan, who had been a fairly long-time veteran politician in the state. Begich only lost the general election by around 1.5 percentage points, representing a huge over-performance compared to Obama.

Multiple factors can be attributed to Begich's good performance. Outside of Alaska itself, you could say that Alaska was more isolated from the national environment. Alaskans had voted for Bill Walker in the same year, and seeing how it's geographically located very remote from the rest of the country, it could have also experienced that same remoteness in its political environment that year. Also of note is that Mark Begich comes from arguably the most prominent political family in the state, most of whom were Democrats who had served as mayors of Anchorage or in the state legislature. His name definitely helped him in a state where there are so few politicians simply because there are so few people to begin with.

Going forward to 2018, it was generally a slightly less positive year for Democrats in the state. Bill Walker ran for re-election but lost by a wide margin, partly because independents face unique challenges in maintaining support even when they are incumbents. In the same election, former Senator Mark Begich ran for governor but lost by over seven points — even in a very Democrat-leaning year, where Democrats had won the total House vote by nearly 10 points. Of course, you could say that Bill Walker's candidacy had interfered with Begich's percentage, but still, the fact that he couldn't even come close to winning against the Republican underscored the challenges Democrats still face in the state.

The Introduction of Ranked-Choice Voting in Alaska

Another factor impacting Alaska voting dynamics is that, as of 2021, via referendum, voters in the state chose to make their state voting system ranked-choice, the only state besides Maine to do so.

In ranked-choice voting, all candidates are on the ballot, and there's just one round of voting. Voters rank multiple candidates by preference. When votes are counted, the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated, and this continues until one candidate wins with a majority.

This system has tended to benefit Democrats and moderate Republicans in Alaska. For instance, in the 2022 election, Mary Peltola won despite initially trailing two Republican opponents. Because more voters ranked Peltola as their second choice ahead of Palin, she ultimately prevailed over her. Ranked-choice voting helped Lisa Murkowski as well, whose second-choice votes from minor candidates boosted her over Kelly Tshibaka.

While ranked-choice voting has created an advantage for moderate candidates, it also highlights a challenge for Democrats, as Alaskans tend to prefer moderate Republicans over more extreme candidates - regardless of party affiliation. Alaska’s congressional delegation, including Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, reflects this preference for moderate conservatism. Murkowski and Sullivan are among the more moderate, mainline conservatives in the Senate Republican caucus. Neither of them voted to object to the results in Arizona or Georgia in 2020, and Murkowski actually voted to impeach Trump. Both have shown a relatively cooperative stance with the Biden administration on select issues, in contrast to more hardline Republicans elsewhere,

At the state level, Governor Mike Dunleavy, while conservative, is arguably less so than governors in states like South Dakota or Mississippi. His moderation has helped solidify his popularity among Alaskans.

The state GOP's commitment to moderatism and maintaining a disciplined approach to policy has really gone a long way in firming up the state for Republicans, even as the partisan gap narrows. This is reflected in the state’s legislative leaders, who are all moderate conservatives who tend to keep a low profile nationally and instead devote more energy to state issues. They have a very strong and cohesive institution compared to Republican parties in states like Michigan, which have completely devolved into clown shows.

In summary, Alaska’s political dynamics reflect a distinctive blend of conservatism and openness to moderation, shaped by its demographics, reliance on federal support, secularism, and recent adoption of ranked-choice voting. These factors make Alaska a unique political environment, one where both Republicans and Democrats face opportunities and challenges that are unlikely to fade in the coming years.

To continue this deep-dive, read Alaska, Part 2: Beyond Red and Blue.

1. It’s possible that McCain’s electoral performance was aided by his running mate, then-Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who may have benefited from a "Native Daughter" effect. However, home-state boosts for vice-presidential candidates are sketchy and inconsistent at best, and outright nonexistent at worst.