Could Republicans really lose a Senate race in Nebraska?

Nebraska’s statewide seats have been solidly Republican for years: The party has won a majority in the last five Senate races, the last seven governor’s races, and the last 14 presidential elections.

This cycle, however, independent Senate candidate Dan Osborn — a Navy veteran and former union chief — appears to be making the race much more competitive than it normally is. According to a New York Times/Siena poll released in late October, incumbent Republican Sen. Deb Fischer was up by just 2 percentage points, winning 48 percent support to Osborn’s 46 percent. That’s surprisingly close for a Senate race in the state: In 2018 and 2020, Fischer and former Sen. Ben Sasse (R) won their elections by well over 10 points. 

Osborn has successfully upended what should have been an easy race for Fischer by framing himself as an outsider, as well as a candidate who’s not beholden to — and doesn’t fit in with — either party. 

A mechanic who previously led a union strike against the Kellogg’s cereal company in 2021, Osborn has pitched himself as a true independent, embracing some stances that align with Republicans like building the border wall, while also backing some Democratic ones like opposing national abortion bans. He’s also been quick to criticize members of both parties, while tying himself to national figures beloved in Nebraska, like Trump.

“An important part of his success is that he has successfully portrayed himself as kind of like an anti-partisan,” says Kevin Smith, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 

Osborn has said if he wins, he doesn’t intend to caucus with either party. That outcome would mark a significant loss for Republicans, who’ve counted on Nebraska as a safe seat while they eye the retaking of the Senate majority. Although the GOP could well secure that majority regardless of what happens in Nebraska, an Osborn victory would mean it’s a narrower one, making it more difficult for the party to accomplish its policy goals and confirm judicial nominees.  

A narrowly divided Senate could be good for a Sen. Osborn, however: As recent terms have made evident, such circumstances give independents — including the likes of Sens. Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) — outsize power in shaping legislation. 

How the Nebraska Senate race got so close 

Fischer is a two-term Republican and cattle rancher who currently sits on the Senate Armed Services and Commerce Committees. She’s a relatively standard conservative Republican who has less of a national profile than some of the other lawmakers up this cycle, such as Sens. Ted Cruz (TX) and Josh Hawley (MO). 

Osborn has capitalized on this lack of profile to paint Fischer as a run-of-the-mill politician who is out of touch with her constituents. He argues that she’s gotten wealthier while serving in the Senate without having done much for her constituents. He claims, too, that she’s more responsive to corporations that have donated to her than she is to her fellow Nebraskans. 

In one of the main ads targeting Fischer, Osborn quips that she “has taken so much corporate cash, she should wear patches, like Nascar.” Interestingly, Fischer also previously promised to term limit herself and only serve two terms in the Senate. Her decision to run again appears to contradict that prior position for some voters. 

On the campaign trail, Osborn has also highlighted his history as a union member and his advocacy for better wages and working conditions. He previously gained a profile regionally when he spearheaded a months-long strike against Kellogg’s in Omaha amid worker concerns that the company was shortchanging new employees on issues including pensions and holiday pay. 

“I think the appeal of Osborn is character and backstory. You know essentially that the key message is, I’m a working stiff, just like you guys,” Smith told Vox. 

Although Osborn has said he’d back a bipartisan immigration deal and some form of gun control, he’s also tied himself more closely to Trump in recent ads. In one, he criticizes Fischer for pulling her support of the former president after the Access Hollywood tape came out in 2016 and compares her to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In another, he says that he’s “where President Trump is” on a host of issues including “China, corruption, the border.”

His union resume and iconoclastic policy positions appear to be helping him build a broad, unusual coalition. His nonpartisan stance has been appealing to independents, while his critiques of Washington and his affinity for some of Trump’s policies appeal to Republicans who may be fed up with the existing system. Because there’s no Democrat running in the race and thanks to his union background, he’s also likely to pick up sizable Democratic support. 

“I think that Fischer’s campaign was not expecting this to be a competitive race, but they really weren’t paying very much attention to him earlier in the campaign cycle,” says Dona-Gene Barton, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 

Fischer’s campaign has “acknowledged that the race is closer than expected,” the Associated Press reports. And she’s rejected Osborn’s characterization: She’s touted her conservative record as well as her endorsement from Trump, describing Osborn as “too far left.”

Because of Republicans’ dominance in the state, experts note that while an Osborn victory is plausible, Fischer likely retains an advantage. “Based on the polling data, [an Osborn win is] very much within the realm of possibility,” says Smith. “If I was a betting person, I’d still give Fischer an edge based on party registrations.”

The size of the Senate majority is at stake

The Senate map is looking fairly dire for Democrats. The party currently holds a narrow majority and faces competitive races in as many as nine states including Montana and Ohio. 

An Osborn win would help offset potential losses that Democrats could well see elsewhere, though it’s not yet evident exactly to what extent. While his success would deprive Republicans of a guaranteed seat, Osborn’s refusal to align with either party could see him working with both on different policies. 

Osborn could operate in the same vein as other independents like Manchin who vote predominantly in line with one of the parties but occasionally deviate on certain issues. He could also be a complete wildcard who parties attempt to cater to in order to win his vote.

In practice, Osborn would eventually have to caucus with one of the parties in order to play a larger role in the Senate. If he didn’t, he’d likely have a tough time getting key spots on committees. Senators are best able to effect change and craft policy using these panels, which shape legislation and hold hearings. 

“The reality is, if you want to be on a committee, then you need to be with a party,” says J. Miles Coleman, an associate editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball. 

The Senate majority aside, a loss in a safely Republican state at this level would still deal a major blow to the GOP. 

“I think how Democrats are looking at it is that it would still net a loss for Republicans,” says Cook Political Report Senate expert Jessica Taylor.