The Working-Class Independent Is Popular in Polls. Winning Takes Two More Things

Ask voters whether they’d support an independent candidate and most say yes. In a July national survey for the Independent Center, a pro-independent advocacy group, 70.8% said they were likely to vote for “a strong, well-funded independent.”

In the same survey, only 6.3% chose an independent or third-party candidate on the generic congressional ballot.

The gap between those two numbers explains much of the 2026 cycle. Voters have a clear picture of the independent they want, but that picture can differ a lot from voter to voter. The real candidates also rarely match with the ideal candidate people create in their minds when answering this question.

However, there are several competitive independents running this cycle. There are also some who are not competitive, or who have already lost their elections in primaries.

So, what differentiates these candidates?

The Profile Voters Describe

Polling on candidate traits points in a consistent direction. In a Change Research survey of 1,588 likely voters, 67% called a working-class background a “green flag,” and almost no one saw it as a negative. Military service was a green flag for 55% and a red flag for 3%. Being a billionaire was a red flag for 52% of all voters and for more than two in three independents.

Lack of experience barely registered: 60% said never having held office makes no difference.

A large survey experiment from the Center for Working-Class Politics, funded by Jacobin and the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung (both very much leftist organizations), found much the same. It tested hypothetical Democratic candidates, not independents. Working-class voters penalized an elite professional résumé more than any other background. Small-business owners, teachers, nurses, and service workers did about as well as blue-collar candidates.

Among working-class independents, leading with economic issues added about four points.

The resulting profile is a non-elite outsider, ideally a veteran, who isn’t wealthy and talks about the cost of living issues facing most Americans, with life experience that shows they’ve experienced those financial issues.

The polling also shows what holds voters back from voting for these candidates. In Gallup’s September 2025 survey, 74% of independents favored a third party. Only about 15% of all respondents said they were very likely to vote for one. Fifty-seven percent were very concerned about wasting their vote, and 59% were concerned about helping the candidate they like least.

Nebraska: All Three Conditions

Dan Osborn fits the profile closely. He is a former Kellogg’s mechanic and union president and a Navy veteran. He is running against Sen. Pete Ricketts, a billionaire former governor, and has said he won’t caucus with either party.

He also meets the other two conditions. Osborn has raised $9.8 million. The field is clear: Democratic nominee Cindy Burbank withdrew in July, and the Legal Marijuana NOW nominee dropped out and endorsed Osborn.

Polls have the race within the margin of error. Independent YouGov polling had Osborn ahead 48% to 47%, and averages across four aggregators put Ricketts ahead by less than a point. In August, a poll for Osborn’s campaign by Impact Research found the race tied while Republicans led the generic ballot by 11. That is a campaign poll, but it measures the gap between Osborn and the Republican / Democratic matches in other races in the state.

There are reasons for caution. Osborn led or tied in many polls of his 2024 race against Sen. Deb Fischer and lost by about seven points. Most Nebraska polling this year has had a partisan or campaign sponsor. Osborn’s favorability is positive in Democratic-aligned polls and 13 points underwater in a Republican one. Prediction markets give Ricketts about a 70% chance of winning as of the morning of 10/29.

Still, Osborn is the only one of the three who matches the profile and meets the additional criteria laid out by voters that would make them actually vote for an independent. He’s also the only independent candidate in a race polling within the margin of error.

Wisconsin: The Profile Without the Money

Mike Thurow may fit the profile even more closely than Osborn. He is a 39-year-old union fire captain who leads the Milwaukee Fire Department’s HAZMAT team, and he spent nearly a decade at Health Care for the Homeless. He takes no corporate PAC money and has never held office. He is backed by Osborn’s Working Class Heroes Fund. Our October 23 roundup framed WI-6 as a test of whether the Osborn model can work for a House seat.

The one public poll suggests the profile matters. In May, Tavern Research found Rep. Glenn Grothman beating a generic Democrat 61% to 39%, but leading Thurow only 55% to 45%. Independents chose Thurow 64% to 36%. However, about nine in 10 voters had never heard of him.

That may be a relic of his failure to check the other two boxes that Osborn checks. Thurow has raised $194,576 and had $17,936 on hand, against Grothman’s $600,072. Democrat Brad Smith won his primary and remains on the ballot, along with a second independent. No public poll has tested the three- or four-way race.

The polling shows voters reward Thurow’s background when they hear about it. Without the money, most of them haven’t heard about it, and polling suggests that they’d need to believe he can win before they’d vote for him over others on the ballot.

Montana: The Money Without the Clear Field

Seth Bodnar has more money than anyone in his race. He has raised $4.9 million, compared with $3.0 million for Republican Kurt Alme and about $190,000 for Democrat Alani Bankhead. He is a former Green Beret, and he has pledged not to caucus with either party.

His background is also the kind the class research says working-class voters penalize most: first in his class at West Point, Rhodes Scholar, General Electric executive, university president. His coalition matches that finding. A September poll for Montana Freedom PAC, which supports Bodnar, found him at 39% among four-year college graduates and 27% among voters without a degree.

His bigger obstacle, however, is the viability concern. In head-to-head polling, Bodnar has seen results roughly even against the incumbent. However, unlike in Nebraska, the Democrat (Bankhead) did not step aside. In polls representing the race as it’ll appear on ballots next week, Alme leads. Polls without a campaign or partisan sponsor since September average Alme 44%, Bodnar 28% and Bankhead 20%.

Many have noted that Bodnar has led Bankhead in most polls, and many have argued that Democrats are more likely to support an independent who can beat a Republican incumbent than independents are likely to support a Democrat. However, with the race as it stands, the anti-incumbent vote is being split, and it’s hard to see a path for Bodnar to win the election under those circumstances.

What the Comparison Shows

The polling on what voters want from an independent creates a specific profile for the candidate. Voters say they want a working-class outsider who isn’t owned by donors. They vote for one when that candidate looks like a serious alternative and doesn’t have to share the anti-incumbent vote with a party nominee.

That puts the decisive factors largely outside the candidate’s control: whether donors fund the campaign, and whether another party steps aside, leaving just two primary contenders on the ballot. Both of those might end up easier after this election cycle, should several independent campaigns show that they can put up a real fight against an incumbent member of a political party that the minority party has little chance of beating. Right now, their pitch is largely prospective; having real examples to back up their pitch could only help make that pitch stronger.