Who are the candidates in the December 2 2025 special election?

1. Why two names dominate the coverage and what reporters agree on

Most analyses identify Matt Van Epps (R) and Aftyn Behn (D) as the core general-election contenders who advanced or were positioned for the December 2, 2025 special election, reflecting the expected two-party matchup in a high-profile vacancy created by Representative Mark Green’s resignation. The October 29 analysis explicitly lists only those two candidates as participants in the special general ^[1], and other summaries reiterate their centrality while adding independent names. The consistency across contemporaneous write-ups indicates bipartisan recognition of Van Epps and Behn as the primary contenders, even where reporting diverges about additional entrants ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Independent candidates: a tangle of names and listings

At least two analyses expand the candidate roster to include multiple independents: Teresa (Terri) Christie, Robert James Sutherby (Robert Sutherby), Jonathan (Jon) Thorp, and Bobby Dodge are named across sources that report a fuller ballot for the special election ^{[2] [3]}. The November 6 pieces enumerate four independent candidates in addition to the major-party nominees ^{[2] [3]}, while an October 29 account omits independents, implying either later filings, certification updates, or reporting differences. The presence of variant spellings and first-name variants (Teresa/Terri, Jonathan/Jon) points to inconsistencies in aggregation and transcription rather than necessarily contradictory underlying facts ^{[2] [3]}.

3. Timeline matters: how dates and reporting cadence explain conflicts

Reporting clustered from October 28 through November 6, 2025, produces a plausible explanation for divergent lists: earlier coverage (October 28–29) featured the major-party finalists immediately following a special primary, while later November 6 write-ups include independent filings or updated certified ballots ^{[4] [1] [2] [3]}. One analysis specifically notes that a special primary occurred October 7 and that results are available, implying post-primary developments could add or drop names ahead of a December 2 special general ^[5]. The temporal sequencing of primary results, certification windows, and last-minute independent filings explains why some outlets list only Van Epps and Behn while others list additional independents ^{[5] [1] [2]}.

4. Reconciling the lists: what is most likely to be official

Given the pattern in the analyses, the most reliable working roster includes Van Epps and Behn as the major-party nominees with several independent candidates reported by later summaries. The October 7 primary and subsequent reporting cadence suggest the bipartisan finalists were established early ^{[5] [1]}, while the November 6 summaries that add independents reflect either certified ballot additions or separate candidacy filings for the December 2 special general ^{[2] [3]}. Where source analyses conflict on independents, the divergence likely stems from updates in certification or reporting lags, not substantive disagreement about the major-party nominees ^{[5] [2] [3]}.

5. What to watch next and how to verify the final ballot

To resolve remaining uncertainty, look for the official certified special-election ballot or state election office postings that finalize candidate lists after the filing and certification window closes; one analysis explicitly points to available special-primary results as context for who advanced toward the December 2 contest ^[5]. The November 6 accounts that enumerate independents provide a narrower window for when names appeared in reporting, indicating that any lasting disagreement about independents will hinge on certification dates in early November ^{[2] [3]}. For immediate clarity, prioritize the most recent contemporaneous reports dated November 6 and the state’s certification notes referenced in the October-to-November reporting sequence ^{[2] [3] [5]}.