New Montana governor goes after Bush admin

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

He points out the hyprocisty on prescription drugs from Canada.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/02/26/national/w081015S32.DTL


Just because you're from a red state doesn't mean that you can't blast Bush.

[Moooooo]

Give em' hell, Brian.  I knew I was gonna' like this guy.

[Frodo]

this is a little off topic, but are there any underlying trends that are leading Montanans to vote Democratic at the state and local level, trends that apparently are not yet being seen in other intermountain states like Wyoming and Idaho? 

[bgwah]

this is a little off topic, but are there any underlying trends that are leading Montanans to vote Democratic at the state and local level, trends that apparently are not yet being seen in other intermountain states like Wyoming and Idaho? 

No.

[Frodo]

this is a little off topic, but are there any underlying trends that are leading Montanans to vote Democratic at the state and local level, trends that apparently are not yet being seen in other intermountain states like Wyoming and Idaho? 

No.

okay, so why are they voting Democratic all of a sudden when their compatriots in adjacent states are still voting Republican?  it can't be in a void. 

[bgwah]

Wyoming has a Democrat governor already.

Montana has a liberal large (for Montana) city, Missoula. They also have a somewhat large Native American population, which votes Democrat.

Montana is sort of libertarian.

They've had a Democrat senator for decades.

Montana had a Democrat governor from 1969 to 1989, so them electing a Democrat again isn't too significant.

[Moooooo]

Populism.  Here is a great article that describes how Brian Schweitzer and other Montana Democrats are taking controll of the state.

"In addition to a winning personality and strong populist convictions, Schweitzer had an innovative, three-part political strategy, one that perfectly fit the current conditions in Montana, but which Democrats across the country could learn from. First, Schweitzer took advantage of public dissatisfaction with two decades of insular one-party rule in the state capital, casting himself as an outsider and a reformer. Second, he rallied small business, usually a solidly GOP constituency, to his side by opposing the deals Republicans had cut in Washington and Helena to favor large or out-of-state corporations over local entrepreneurs. Third, and most interesting of all, Schweitzer figured out how to win over one of the most important, reliably Republican, and symbolically significant groups of voters: hunters and fishermen."

rest or article:  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

[bgwah]

He should run for President.

[Rob]

He should run for President.

I agree. Schweitzer is awesome.

[bgwah]

He should run for President.

I agree. Schweitzer is awesome.

I thought about mentioning him as a possible candidate in the 2008 section, but didn't. I wonder if I should (if someone hasn't already)?

[Rob]

He should run for President.

I agree. Schweitzer is awesome.

I thought about mentioning him as a possible candidate in the 2008 section, but didn't. I wonder if I should (if someone hasn't already)?

At least mention him as a possible VP. The man needs more respect!

[MN--Troy]

this is a little off topic, but are there any underlying trends that are leading Montanans to vote Democratic at the state and local level, trends that apparently are not yet being seen in other intermountain states like Wyoming and Idaho? 

No.

okay, so why are they voting Democratic all of a sudden when their compatriots in adjacent states are still voting Republican?  it can't be in a void. 

Brian Schweitzer was just fortunate enough to run and win the governor?s race in Montana where the low approval ratings of Judy Marz(sp?), in most case, rubbed off negatively on the Republican gubernatorial candidate causing Schweitzer to win. Other times, the other side gets hold of an issue and that resonates with the voters.

[Moooooo]

Brian Schweitzer was just fortunate enough to run and win the governor?s race in Montana where the low approval ratings of Judy Marz(sp?), in most case, rubbed off negatively on the Republican gubernatorial candidate causing Schweitzer to win. Other times, the other side gets hold of an issue and that resonates with the voters.

Im sure that played a little bit of a role in his election, but from what I can gather he run's great campaigns and the people of Montana agree with him on alot of issues.  I mean, he came awful close to beating Conrad Burns back in the 2000 senate race and Burns is a pretty popular/powerful guy in the state of Montana.

Again, for anyone who interested in a detailed analysis of Schweitzer's win, read this article:  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

[MN--Troy]

Brian Schweitzer was just fortunate enough to run and win the governor?s race in Montana where the low approval ratings of Judy Marz(sp?), in most case, rubbed off negatively on the Republican gubernatorial candidate causing Schweitzer to win. Other times, the other side gets hold of an issue and that resonates with the voters.

Im sure that played a little bit of a role in his election, but from what I can gather he run's great campaigns and the people of Montana agree with him on alot of issues.  I mean, he came awful close to beating Conrad Burns back in the 2000 senate race and Burns is a pretty popular/powerful guy in the state of Montana.

Again, for anyone who interested in a detailed analysis of Schweitzer's win, read this article:  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Burns considered a vulnerable candidate in 2000?

[Moooooo]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Burns considered a vulnerable candidate in 2000?

Yes, mostly because Schweitzer was the candidate.

[WalterMitty]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

[Rob]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

Tell that to Schweitzer.

[WalterMitty]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

Tell that to Schweitzer.

um.  he beat a very unpopular governor,

i dont think his idiotic populism was what carried him to victory.

[bgwah]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

Tell that to Schweitzer.

um.  he beat a very unpopular governor,

i dont think his idiotic populism was what carried him to victory.

The unpopular governor retired and was not running.

[PBrunsel]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

I'll applaud you for that. Man John Edwards got on my nerves!

[WalterMitty]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

Tell that to Schweitzer.

um.  he beat a very unpopular governor,

i dont think his idiotic populism was what carried him to victory.

The unpopular governor retired and was not running.

i stand corrected.

but my point stands, the unpopularity of the republican incumbent was the key ingredient to his victory.

[Moooooo]

oh dear lord.  the democrats think populism is their key to victory.   wasnt john edwards the populist savior? 

note to democrats:  it isnt 1896 (not that populism worked for yall then, either).  get with the 21st century.

populism=a joke.

Edwards was hardly a populist.  He was liberal all around.

[Moooooo]

i stand corrected.

but my point stands, the unpopularity of the republican incumbent was the key ingredient to his victory.

It played a role, but hardly the key role.  His opponent Bob Brown, was a very popular Republican secretary of state and a two-decade fixture in Montana politics.  Schweitzer won by a solid 4 points.

[bgwah]

And what makes him a populist?

[Moooooo]

And what makes him a populist?

Who?