Dems Use Nebraska Senate Primary To Boost ‘Fake Independent’
This article argues that Nebraska Democrats are using next week’s 2026 U.S. Senate primary in a way that will ultimately benefit their preferred general-election candidate while undermining a fair contest. It says the likely matchup in November hinges on whether Republican Pete Ricketts wins the GOP primary, and that the Democrat-backed “nonpartisan” candidate Dan Osborn-described as a “fake independent”-would then face him.
The piece claims that Democrat leaders and donors have positioned Osborn as a puppet-like choice to an actual partisan Democrat candidate, citing his ties to left-leaning donors and strategists, including national Democrats and groups linked to Marc Elias. It also alleges that Osborn has used platforms and campaign practices the article characterizes as problematic, including ActBlue and complaints that campaign funds were steered to family members.
it further focuses on the Nebraska Democratic primary, where Cindy Burbank and William Forbes are competing. The article portrays Burbank as a “placeholder” whose campaign is meant to remove or weaken “fake” opposition in the primary-particularly “fake Forbes,” which it says aims to split the vote against Ricketts-so that Democratic voters will support Osborn in the general election. It recounts that Burbank was initially removed from the ballot due to claims she did not intend to serve if elected, but later regained access through litigation, which the article attributes to Marc Elias’s law firm. The text also points to statements it claims show Nebraska Democrats endorse Osborn while urging Burbank voters to turn out.
the article broadens its argument by saying Nebraska is just one more example of Democrats “rigging” elections-comparing it to other national controversies it discusses, such as nominee replacement efforts in 2024 and various gerrymandering-related conflicts-arguing that Democrats treat “democracy” as something to be manipulated when it advances their agenda.
Nebraskans will vote next week in the U.S Senate primary race to determine which Republican and which Democrat will face off in November for the congressional seat. But a closer look reveals the latest in Democrat election rigging — complete with legal help from Russia Collusion hoaxer Marc Elias. The apparent master plan involves leveraging the primary race to prop up the so-called “nonpartisan” candidate vying for the Senate seat, who, under an “independent” facade, has deep leftist ties that could threaten fair representation in the red state.
On May 12, Democrat candidates Cindy Burbank and William Forbes will face off in the Democrat primary for the U.S. Senate seat. Republican incumbent Pete Ricketts will face his primary opposition on the same day. However, as The New York Times points out, if Ricketts secures the primary victory, his competitor in the general election is most likely to be Dan Osborn — the “nonpartisan” candidate endorsed by the Nebraska Democrat leaders and widely known to be a “fake independent.”
Osborn has claimed he is “not beholden to a party boss.” But as Fox News has detailed, Osborn received campaign contributions from prominent, out-of-state Democrats, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and, during his failed 2024 campaign for the same seat, Sen. Chuck Schumer’s PAC.
Osborn has also been a client of Fight Agency, a Democrat strategist agency that also collaborated with leftists like Bernie Sanders and Zohran Mamdani. Osborn also uses the clearly fraud-ridden Democrat fundraising platform ActBlue and has come under fire for “funneling” a large quantity of campaign cash to members of his family.
National Republican Senatorial Committee Regional Press Secretary Nick Puglia told The Federalist “there’s no doubt” Osborn “wants to import the radical left’s agenda into Nebraska.” According to Fox, “even top Democrats have suggested they will pick up another seat in Congress if Osborn wins.”
Unlike in 2024, candidates are running in a Democrat primary in Nebraska for the U.S. Senate seat this year. As previously mentioned, this includes Burbank, who was thrown off the primary ballot in March by Republican Secretary of State Bob Evnan. According to the Nebraska Examiner, Evnan’s decision came after Nebraska Republicans filed a complaint alleging Burbank “is not a ‘good-faith’ candidate, because she has no plans to serve in the office she seeks.” They highlighted remarks on the Democrat’s website, where she “wrote that if she won the Democratic nomination, she would support nonpartisan candidate Dan Osborn against Republican U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts.”
Burbank successfully sued to get back on the ballot, represented by none other than Democrat lawfare-fiend Marc Elias‘ law firm. (Notably, Elias’ law firm is also on Osborn’s payroll, according to FEC filings.)
Burbank’s campaign website still endorses Osborn, including her obvious commitment to help him secure a “fair shot against Ricketts.” In fact, the primary purpose of Burbank’s campaign is clearly to promote Osborn and disparage her fellow Democrat candidate, Forbes, whom she and other state Democrats claim is a “fake” planted by Ricketts in the primary to “split the vote against him and win.” Forbes said he voted for Trump in previous elections but also insisted “that he’s a lifelong Democrat,” CNN reported.
Nebraska Democrat officials claimed Burbank’s campaign was to counteract Forbes, but Ricketts has “denied any involvement with Forbes,” the Nebraska Examiner reported last month.
Either way, Burbank is not merely running to “split the vote” as Forbes is accused of doing. After setting herself up as a Democrat in the primary, she is expected to drop out of the race if she wins the nomination, thus presumably using her victory to send her voters to Osborn.
Nebraska Republican Party Chair Mary-Jane Truemper told The Federalist that “Cindy Burbank is not a candidate. She is a placeholder, and everyone knows it. She filed to win a nomination she intends to hand to Dan Osborn, and the Nebraska Democratic Party has been bankrolling that strategy from the start.”
Truemper also pointed out how both Osborn and the chair of the state’s Democrat Party, Jane Kleeb, told voters to go vote for Burbank in the primary.
“Jane Kleeb is endorsing Osborn with one hand and pushing Burbank voters to the polls with the other,” she said. “Osborn himself is begging Democrats to vote for her. This is not politics. This is a con. We fully expect Burbank to follow through on her own stated plan and disappear the moment the primary is called.”
The Nebraska Democrat Party essentially admitted to the plan on X.
Enter Cindy Burbank. We must vote for her to knock fake Forbes out of the Primary and allow Osborn to take on Ricketts one-on-one in Nov. This is how we send Ricketts packing. This is the way to break the one-party rule. Know the facts as you vote early or vote on Tues, May 12th.
— Nebraska Democratic Party (@NebraskaDems) May 5, 2026
The Federalist reached out to Osborn’s campaign, Burbank, and Nebraska Democrats for comment, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
Democrat Election Rigging
The apparent effort in Nebraska to foist up a Senate candidate for voters who does not even plan to compete for the congressional seat is just the latest example of Democrats exploiting elections and voters to consolidate power — only pretending to care about “Democracy” when it benefits their agenda.
This is the party that essentially launched a coup to unilaterally replace then-President Joe Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris as the 2024 presidential nominee — even after voters supported Biden in the primaries. Ironically, this is also the party — when independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy decided before the 2024 general election that it would be more detrimental for the country for him to split the vote between Harris and Trump in certain states — that fought to keep him on the ballot in the states where Kennedy’s absence might help Trump. On the other hand, leftists in states like Colorado tried to kick Trump off the 2024 ballot altogether.
On a more local and recent note, when it became clear this year that the sexual assault scandal surrounding Democrat gubernatorial candidate Eric Swalwell might lead to a GOP victory in California, Democrats did not hesitate to box him out, either.
Ahead of the 2026 midterms, Democrats have also already been relentless in their efforts to launch expansive — and in the case of left-wing-run Virginia, potentially illegal — gerrymandering campaigns to take back the majority in the House of Representatives. And that doesn’t even include Democrat efforts to rig elections in their favor by redistricting according to race. Even though the Supreme Court put the kibosh on unconstitutional racial gerrymandering last week, reports emerged beforehand that the Democrat-appointed justices were slow-walking the decision so that it would “not be issued in time for many Republican states to actually go in and redistrict based on the decision.”
As the latest deep-dive in Nebraska once again highlights, Democrats will stop at nothing to redefine and rig so-called “Democracy” in their favor.
Maisey Jefferson is a staff editor at The Federalist. She graduated from Gordon College in the greater Boston area with a degree in English and Professional Writing. You can follow her on X at @jeffermaisey.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
