MT-AL: Rob Quist (D) vs. Greg Gianforte (R) vs. Mark Wicks (L), May 25

[Klartext89]

Of course Greg Gianforte could only win because of Russian interference who clearly changes the vote pattern :-D

Hey Dems, tired of losing yet? No worry, there's a lot more to come ^^

And don't forget: His name was Seth Rich!

I'm just laughing so hard right now. Was going to bed yesterday texting my election nerd buddy that I have a bad feeling, weaking up reading about a 6 points win and just WOW! Thank you Montana!

By the way, the Dems always get 40% in Montana, so 44% is really an embarrassement.

[Tender Branson]

Since only small Glacier is left, it's pretty easy to project the final statewide results:

50.2% Gianforte (+/- 0.1%)
44.2% Quist (+/- 0.1%)
  5.6% Wicks (+/- 0.1%)
 
Gianforte wins by 6%.

[Lachi]

This result was absolutely disgusting.

[Klartext89]

This result was absolutely disgusting.

I love it

[Tender Branson]

This result was absolutely disgusting.

Why ?

It's almost a 10-point swing from Juneau 2016 (D) to Quist 2017 (D) and a 14-point swing from Hillary to Quist.

You cannot expect to erase 15-20 point R-leads in a R-state like KS or MT over a few months.

These swings bode really well for Ossoff though, because the Atlanta suburbs are far more allergic to Trump than KS or MT.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Well... Looks like people don't care about crime. Maybe we should just drop the constitution and close Congress? Laws don't matter anyway.

[Lachi]

This result was absolutely disgusting.

Why ?

It's almost a 10-point swing from Juneau 2016 (D) to Quist 2017 (D) and a 14-point swing from Hillary to Quist.

You cannot expect to erase 15-20 point R-leads in a R-state like KS or MT over a few months.

These swings bode really well for Ossoff though, because the Atlanta suburbs are far more allergic to Trump than KS or MT.

It's disgusting that a thug who assaulted a news reporter was able to win.

[Shadows]

With more of Missoula coming in, the margin is down to 6% (not bad from a 20% loss). Still looks hard for Tester in 2018, but doable considering Quist had some issues. Gianforte without the assault is still a terrible candidate with religious nutjob views & uber conservative stances.

This was too polarized (still 90%+ of Trump's voters still like him). Give him time to fail. This seat will be in play in 2018 & surely in 2020 (when more millennials come in & baby boomers die) ! Montana will be in play for the Democrats in the long term !

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Glacier finally has 1/16 precincts in...and so far Assaulterforte is leading even though this county was 62% Clinton.

[Klartext89]

Very funny how a "close, competitive race" has gone to "it wasn't about winning" in a couple of hours :-D

But yeah, losing only by 6 points in a state with a 1-1 Senate split, a Dem Govenor and a lot of Dem Reps in the past is Clearing a sign of Dems taking over the House in a landslide! Spin pin Spin!

[jamestroll]

Very funny how a "close, competitive race" has gone to "it wasn't about winning" in a couple of hours :-D

But yeah, losing only by 6 points in a state with a 1-1 Senate split, a Dem Govenor and a lot of Dem Reps in the past is Clearing a sign of Dems taking over the House in a landslide! Spin pin Spin!

You need to quiet down.

First of all Quist was a flawed candidate, Democrats were way outspent, the news of the body slam broke too late and Quist is a gun control nut.

Not a great result but not a horrid result for Democrats either.

And special elections tell nothing about the general election in 2018.

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

With more of Missoula coming in, the margin is down to 6% (not bad from a 20% loss). Still looks hard for Tester in 2018, but doable considering Quist had some issues. Gianforte without the assault is still a terrible candidate with religious nutjob views & uber conservative stances.

This was too polarized (still 90%+ of Trump's voters still like him). Give him time to fail. This seat will be in play in 2018 & surely in 2020 (when more millennials come in & baby boomers die) ! Montana will be in play for the Democrats in the long term !

Montana could get a second House seat for the 2022 election. I'd say that they could make it a 1-1 split between Dems and Republicans. It would make up for a possible loss of RI's second seat.

[Klartext89]

Very funny how a "close, competitive race" has gone to "it wasn't about winning" in a couple of hours :-D

But yeah, losing only by 6 points in a state with a 1-1 Senate split, a Dem Govenor and a lot of Dem Reps in the past is Clearing a sign of Dems taking over the House in a landslide! Spin pin Spin!

You need to quiet down.

First of all Quist was a flawed candidate, Democrats were way outspent, the news of the body slam broke too late and Quist is a gun control nut.

Not a great result but not a horrid result for Democrats either.

And special elections tell nothing about the general election in 2018.

Yeah, the body slam of a left-wing British reporter would have reaaaaaaaaally changed the race, keep yourself telling it ^^

The opposition always does better in a special election cause the baseis more energized and wants to send a message.

If Trump and the AHCA bill would be soooo unpopular, the Dems would have won. They didn't - I know why.

[jamestroll]

stop.

Quist was a flawed candidate and there are much better districts for Democrats to win in for 2018.

I do believe they can take a majority but it will be more through rust belt districts and some southern suburbia districts.

[Shadows]

Zinke has held this for 20 years & didn't fall even in the anti-Bush & Obama wave years of 2006 & 2008. If this would fall, it would be beyond a landslide for House Republicans. Republicans hold close to 25 seats in NY & CA alone. Democrats have never needed the Montana House to win a landslide election.

Trump won by 21%, Gianforte by 6%. A 15% Swing is pretty big. And Ryan Zinke won by 15%. If you have a 9% swing everywhere from 2016 House results , then Republicans are facing a landslide loss !

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Tonight's Map (Non-Atlas Colors):



2016 President (Atlas Colors):



So Quist flipped a total of five counties to the dem side:

Lewis and Clark: Trump +7 to Quist +9
Park*: Trump +15 to Quist +4
Hill*: Trump +17 to Quist + <1
Blaine*: Trump +2 to Quist +6
Roosevelt*: Trump +6 to Quist+5

* Winner had less than 3600 votes

But only one of them was a county that actually mattered. And he lost the key counties of Cascade and Lake, and failed to keep Assaulterforte from running away with Flathead and Yellowstone.

Truly an embarrassing performance.

[smoltchanov]

+100. And there is no Great Depression for almost 4 years NOW, as it was by the time of FDR election. I admire FDR, but US now is not what it was in November 1932.... And after depression was ... well, mitigated by 1937-38, even FDR began to have some problems and to lose some "initial supporters" (in the South, for example, which gradually began to doubt him at least..).

Another untrue statement. FDR won every single state in the South in 1940 - To repeat, every single one & had 449 Electoral college votes.

It seems to me that you are not reading what other people write before beginning to write yourself.

Of course he did - after all it was solid South which was ready to vote for much weaker candidates, then FDR. But have you ever heard about "Conservative manifesto" (written, BTW, by Democratic senator)? About "Texas regulars", which all were registered Democrats? About solid resistance (including - on part of many Democrats) to FDR attempts to pack the Supreme Court or  purge his party opponents (usualy - conservative Southerners) from Senate? If in 1933-36 almost all (even conservative) Democrats supported most of the Roosevelt program - by 1937-38 a wide cracks in his coalition appeared. If not for pre-war (and then - war) situation in Europe, which threatened the whole world, FDR chances for reelection would be lower, as more people would think about "Enough!" line.

Of course party was more economically radical in FDR 1st (and beginning of 2nd) term - out of desperation after almost 4 years of Great Depression. Now you can't have a whore for $1 (or even cheaper) as was the case in many cases then - you will need to spend much more. Generally, economically most Americans are substantially better now, then in 1930th, and middle class is substantially bigger (of course - there are lot of poor people too, but - not as much as then, and social security works better simply because there was only little of it then). And with that comes "reorientation": people, who have something to lose, have different sort of problems and priorities then piss poor one. In short - US became much less radical economically  and much more liberal socially since FDR time (who spoke about "gay marriage" then? Not even the wildest of liberals, usually)

I may look to be Kassandra, but US will have a lot of problems in the next 30 years. So much that it can find itself on the verge of split. Berkely, California and Abilene, Texas were substantially closer then, then now. At least they could talk to each other and understand each other. Not so now..

[Shadows]

Greg Gianforte
Rep.
188,580   50.3%   

Rob Quist
Dem.
164,667   44.0   

Mark Wicks
Lib.
21,340   5.7



98% reporting (666 of 681 precincts)

[JGibson]

Zinke has held this for 20 years & didn't fall even in the anti-Bush & Obama wave years of 2006 & 2008. If this would fall, it would be beyond a landslide for House Republicans. Republicans hold close to 25 seats in NY & CA alone. Democrats have never needed the Montana House to win a landslide election.

Trump won by 21%, Gianforte by 6%. A 15% Swing is pretty big. And Ryan Zinke won by 15%. If you have a 9% swing everywhere from 2016 House results , then Republicans are facing a landslide loss !

In 1996, Rick Hill (R) knocked off incumbent Pat Williams (D).

During the big 2006 and 2008 Blue waves and the 2010 Red wave, Denny Rehberg (R) was the one representing MT-AL.  Rehberg was in there from 2001-2013.

Current Senator Steve Daines (R) was in this seat for one term from 2013-2015.

Then, Ryan Zinke (R) won in 2014 and took over from 2015-April 2017.

[smoltchanov]

I know Franklin Delano Roosevelt. My great-grandparents voted for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Bernie Sanders is no Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

+100. And there is no Great Depression for almost 4 years NOW, as it was by the time of FDR election. I admire FDR, but US now is not what it was in November 1932.... And after depression was ... well, mitigated by 1937-38, even FDR began to have some problems and to lose some "initial supporters" (in the South, for example, which gradually began to doubt him at least..).

Another untrue statement. FDR won every single state in the South in 1940 - To repeat, every single one & had 449 Electoral college votes.

The great depression will never be similar to any even that has happened after that (as someone who has studied it a bit), but the conditions in many ways are remarkable similar - Similar rates of tax rates, falling real wages for the middle & lower class, massive income inequality, stock market crash & slowdown, abuse of power by financial institutions, concentration of economic & political power.

If people are looking for exact replication of the Great Depression, it may never come in human history !

Naaturally - he did. It was a SOLID South then. But a lot of Southern politicians began quietly (and in some cases - openly) sabotage him and his programseven before. Remember "Conservative Manifesto"? Or "Texas Regulars"?. It was a begiining of end for FDR coalition of 1932-36

It was not just the South, but conservative faction was always opposed to FDR who he bullied, conducted primaries & defeated & connected personally with people to win big & bypass them. Your comments about the South are totally untrue & paints an incorrect picture of history.

I wrote more detailed commentary recently, but you seem to prefer living in "liberal bubble" and know nothing about anything else. In such case i don't see any need in continuing any discussion with you. It's you, who lies and knows nothing about American history.

[Technocracy Timmy]

The FDR coalition didn't really end until 1980. Even Eisenhower and Nixon by and large governed like New Deal Democrats. Reagan set the stage for a completely different outlook on government and he was boosted by Tip O'Neill and the Democrats who helped Reagan get most of his agenda through during the 80's.

[smoltchanov]

The FDR coalition didn't really end until 1980. Even Eisenhower and Nixon by and large governed like New Deal Democrats. Reagan set the stage for a completely different outlook on government

Of course. But this coalition was never as large and as influential as in 1933-36, when it could pass almost (i stress this word) any neccessary legislation. In 1937-38 difficulties began to emerge...

[Technocracy Timmy]

The FDR coalition didn't really end until 1980. Even Eisenhower and Nixon by and large governed like New Deal Democrats. Reagan set the stage for a completely different outlook on government

Of course. But this coalition was never as large and as influential as in 1933-36, when it could pass almost (i stress this word) any neccessary legislation. In 1937-38 difficulties began to emerge...

True. The biggest impediment to FDR's New Deal from 33-36' was the Supreme Court if I remember correctly.

[Sumner 1868]

The FDR coalition didn't really end until 1980. Even Eisenhower and Nixon by and large governed like New Deal Democrats. Reagan set the stage for a completely different outlook on government and he was boosted by Tip O'Neill and the Democrats who helped Reagan get most of his agenda through during the 80's.

We had a thread a while back that observed much of the New Deal Coalition was actually still intact as late as 1996:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=227711.0

[Mr. Smith]

Disappointing that he didn't quite reach my last prediction, but he did better than I thought he would right before the body slam.