Julian Beaudion, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in South Dakota, withdrew from the race on Tuesday, August 4, the deadline day for withdrawal. His exit leaves incumbent Republican Sen. Mike Rounds facing independent Brian Bengs in a one-on-one contest in November.
Beaudion had told Politico only days earlier that he would not leave the race. In a written statement he cited a devastating house fire and significant personal financial hardship. He also alleged that “an opponent and those associated with the opponent” had directed intimidating threats at him and his family, saying the attacks were personal rather than political and that his family’s safety was his reason for stepping aside. He did not elaborate and said the time would come to say more.
Beaudion, a Sioux Falls businessman and former state trooper, said he would endorse neither Bengs nor Rounds. He criticized Bengs to the Washington Post, saying Bengs had proven willing to stoop to whatever level necessary to gain power. Bengs responded through a written statement to South Dakota Searchlight, saying he had never spoken ill of Beaudion and would not start.
The state Democratic Party has until Tuesday, August 11 to name a replacement. Its statement Tuesday evening said it respected the decision and that Beaudion would have made an outstanding senator, without indicating whether it will select anyone.
Background
This is the third time this cycle a Democratic Senate nominee in a heavily Republican state has left a race where an independent was also running. Cindy Burbank withdrew in Nebraska, where independent Dan Osborn faces Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts. David Roth ended his campaign in Idaho, where independent Todd Achilles is running against the Republican incumbent.
The strategic theory is straightforward. In states where the Democratic brand is deeply unpopular, an independent who is not carrying that label may perform better, and two non-Republican candidates split the same pool of voters. Bengs has circulated internal polling showing a competitive race against Rounds, but only if Beaudion left.
Bengs is a former Democrat. He was the Democratic nominee against John Thune in 2022 and received 26 percent of the vote.
Some South Dakota Democratic officials had been supporting Beaudion while others publicly urged him to withdraw. The pressure was internal to the party and it was not resolved quietly.
What Different Sides Are Saying
Supporters of consolidation say the math is simple. A Republican incumbent in a state Trump carried by roughly 30 points does not lose a three-way race. Whether an independent can win a two-way race is untested, but it is at least arithmetically possible in a way the alternative is not.
Rounds says the label change is cosmetic. He told NBC News his campaign strategy would not change if the Democrat dropped out, suggesting Bengs is a Democrat in practice. There is a factual basis for that: Bengs ran as a Democrat four years ago. Whether a candidate’s past party registration determines how voters read them now is precisely the question the strategy is testing.
Beaudion rejects the framing that he stepped aside to help Bengs. He said explicitly that this was not his reason and declined to endorse. That distinction matters for how the story is told. The outcome serves the consolidation strategy regardless of his stated motive, but reporting that he withdrew in order to clear the field would go beyond what he said.
On the threat allegations. Beaudion’s statement attributes intimidating threats to an opponent and associates. We have found no independent verification, no specifics, and no law enforcement involvement reported. Bengs did not directly address the allegation in his statement. This is a serious claim that remains unsubstantiated in the public record, and we are reporting that he made it rather than that it occurred.
Critics of the strategy raise a longer-term concern. A party that repeatedly declines to field candidates in a state may find it harder to build the local organization, candidate pipeline, and voter habit that future competitiveness requires. That is an argument about institution-building rather than about November, and it does not have a clean empirical answer.
Note on Scope
Whether South Dakota ends up with no Democrat on the ballot is not settled. The party has until August 11 and has not said what it will do. Two outcomes remain possible.
Accounts of Beaudion’s occupation vary slightly across outlets, described variously as a businessman and as a nonprofit organization leader, alongside his prior service as a state trooper. These may all be accurate at different points and we could not reconcile them from a single authoritative source.
Related Links
- South Dakota’s Democratic nominee for US Senate drops out (South Dakota Searchlight, with the fullest local account)
- Democrat drops out of South Dakota’s Senate race (NBC News, including the Nebraska and Idaho parallels)
- Democrat exits Senate race in South Dakota (Washington Post)
- South Dakota Democrat exits Senate race, clears way for independent (Politico)
- South Dakota’s Democratic nominee for US Senate drops out (KOTA)
- South Dakota Democrat exits Senate race (Election Law Blog)
Discussion Questions
- Should a party run candidates everywhere, even where it cannot win?
- Does a party label tell you much about a candidate?
- Is it fair to pressure a nominee to step aside after they have won a primary?
- What does an independent offer that a party candidate does not?
- If two candidates oppose the incumbent, should one of them drop out?
- Beaudion said he would endorse nobody. What does that tell you?
- How should voters weigh an unverified allegation made by a candidate?
- Does not fielding a candidate hurt a party’s future in a state?
- Should there be a later deadline for replacing a nominee?
- Imagine you are a South Dakota Democrat who voted for Beaudion in June. What do you do in November?
