Adam C. FitzGerald vs. Brian Schweitzer

[SWE]

Schweitzer easily

Discuss with maps

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Schweitzer easily.

[windjammer]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

[TDAS04]

Schweitzer/Schweitzer.

[Meursault]

Schweitzer, effortlessly.

[RogueBeaver]

Schweitzer, effortlessly.

[LeBron]

U.S. Representative Adam C. FitzGerald (D-OH)/U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) - 280 EVs
Former Governor Brian Schweitzer (I-MT)/Former Governor Jesse Ventura (I-MN) - 258 EVs

Against Schweitzer in the primary or the general, he would still lose from failure to gain any populist support in the Northeast (besides VT) and could not appeal to voters in regular Dem establishment strongholds.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

[SWE]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

[Goldwater]

Schweitzer, because I'm a fan of gun nuts.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

No he didn't. He did it because he never wanted to be in the Senate. He'd been saying it for years. People tried to pressure him into it.

[LeBron]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

All of the polls suggested Schweitzer would win the Senate seat easily, yet he declined to run even before the 2 strongest Republicans, Daines or Racicot, made their decisions. Democrats gave Schweitzer not one, but two opportunities to speak at their convention and was considered a potential Obama VP pick in 2008 and this is the thanks Obama and Reid get. He knew our party was desperate when we looking to him when Baucus had to decline a run for re-election following his controversial background check vote and what did Schweitzer do instead? He declined and then when he found out that Bullock was going to appoint his Lt. Governor to the seat, recruited his own former Lt. Governor and got him to run as a Democrat to try and primary John Walsh (who has the backing of Tester, Baucus and other members of the Montana establishment) going as far to say that Bohlinger would crush the "DC bull" by a 2-to-1 margin. In fact, Schweitzer has yet to endorse Walsh even though Walsh worked in Schweitzer's administration and had no faith in Walsh against Bohlinger and has no faith in him against Daines.

While Walsh has been busy attacking Daines for his attacks on rape victims, veterans, Medicare recipients and outsourcing of jobs to China, Schweitzer wanted to have an intra-party fight more than anything else and it was just because Walsh took DSCC money and did a few fundraisers. In fact, these lies that Schweitzer wants to "avoid politics" nowadays are utter lies because he's a TV media darling nowadays and I've seen him repeatedly on MSNBC talking about a variety of political topics (in which case I turn the channel). He lives in luxury down in Texas now as a Montana corporate chairman and still believes he's a regular Montanan nonetheless. He even supports the pipeline which will hurt jobs IN Montana and yet he still has the audacity to attack other politicians like Walsh in the state for not being real Montanans. Also, if Schweitzer is supposedly not interested in being a Washington insider, then he shouldn't even be considering running for President. He'll have to work with a party whose establishment is upset with him and another party on the other end of his ideological spectrum and we know already he can't work with Republicans from his time as Governor and can't work with Democrats either on reasonable compromises. If Schweitzer wants to run as an Independent for President then fine because he'll continue to express how much he loves to criticize and screw over national Democrats, but don't run for President of the party you screwed out of a majority 2 years earlier. Just no.

[Flake]

"schweitzer is traitor because he didn't run for a senate seat he didn't want"

Adam C. FitzGerald/Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald (D) of Ohio
Brian Schweitzer/Amy Klobuchar

[Simfan34]

"schweitzer is traitor because he didn't run for a senate seat he didn't want"

This is one of the more ridiculous things I have ever heard.

[free my dawg]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

All of the polls suggested Schweitzer would win the Senate seat easily, yet he declined to run even before the 2 strongest Republicans, Daines or Racicot, made their decisions. Democrats gave Schweitzer not one, but two opportunities to speak at their convention and was considered a potential Obama VP pick in 2008 and this is the thanks Obama and Reid get. He knew our party was desperate when we looking to him when Baucus had to decline a run for re-election following his controversial background check vote and what did Schweitzer do instead? He declined and then when he found out that Bullock was going to appoint his Lt. Governor to the seat, recruited his own former Lt. Governor and got him to run as a Democrat to try and primary John Walsh (who has the backing of Tester, Baucus and other members of the Montana establishment) going as far to say that Bohlinger would crush the "DC bull" by a 2-to-1 margin. In fact, Schweitzer has yet to endorse Walsh even though Walsh worked in Schweitzer's administration and had no faith in Walsh against Bohlinger and has no faith in him against Daines.

While Walsh has been busy attacking Daines for his attacks on rape victims, veterans, Medicare recipients and outsourcing of jobs to China, Schweitzer wanted to have an intra-party fight more than anything else and it was just because Walsh took DSCC money and did a few fundraisers. In fact, these lies that Schweitzer wants to "avoid politics" nowadays are utter lies because he's a TV media darling nowadays and I've seen him repeatedly on MSNBC talking about a variety of political topics (in which case I turn the channel). He lives in luxury down in Texas now as a Montana corporate chairman and still believes he's a regular Montanan nonetheless. He even supports the pipeline which will hurt jobs IN Montana and yet he still has the audacity to attack other politicians like Walsh in the state for not being real Montanans. Also, if Schweitzer is supposedly not interested in being a Washington insider, then he shouldn't even be considering running for President. He'll have to work with a party whose establishment is upset with him and another party on the other end of his ideological spectrum and we know already he can't work with Republicans from his time as Governor and can't work with Democrats either on reasonable compromises. If Schweitzer wants to run as an Independent for President then fine because he'll continue to express how much he loves to criticize and screw over national Democrats, but don't run for President of the party you screwed out of a majority 2 years earlier. Just no.

He doesn't want to run for Congress. He does not like Congress. He does not want to be in Congress. He did not run because Daines was right on his heels anyway, and any shift in the national climate would have made him the underdog. He did not want to risk his resources on a job he does not want, and he didn't, because Brian Schweitzer is not entitled to the Democratic Party. Get over it.

[LeBron]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

All of the polls suggested Schweitzer would win the Senate seat easily, yet he declined to run even before the 2 strongest Republicans, Daines or Racicot, made their decisions. Democrats gave Schweitzer not one, but two opportunities to speak at their convention and was considered a potential Obama VP pick in 2008 and this is the thanks Obama and Reid get. He knew our party was desperate when we looking to him when Baucus had to decline a run for re-election following his controversial background check vote and what did Schweitzer do instead? He declined and then when he found out that Bullock was going to appoint his Lt. Governor to the seat, recruited his own former Lt. Governor and got him to run as a Democrat to try and primary John Walsh (who has the backing of Tester, Baucus and other members of the Montana establishment) going as far to say that Bohlinger would crush the "DC bull" by a 2-to-1 margin. In fact, Schweitzer has yet to endorse Walsh even though Walsh worked in Schweitzer's administration and had no faith in Walsh against Bohlinger and has no faith in him against Daines.

While Walsh has been busy attacking Daines for his attacks on rape victims, veterans, Medicare recipients and outsourcing of jobs to China, Schweitzer wanted to have an intra-party fight more than anything else and it was just because Walsh took DSCC money and did a few fundraisers. In fact, these lies that Schweitzer wants to "avoid politics" nowadays are utter lies because he's a TV media darling nowadays and I've seen him repeatedly on MSNBC talking about a variety of political topics (in which case I turn the channel). He lives in luxury down in Texas now as a Montana corporate chairman and still believes he's a regular Montanan nonetheless. He even supports the pipeline which will hurt jobs IN Montana and yet he still has the audacity to attack other politicians like Walsh in the state for not being real Montanans. Also, if Schweitzer is supposedly not interested in being a Washington insider, then he shouldn't even be considering running for President. He'll have to work with a party whose establishment is upset with him and another party on the other end of his ideological spectrum and we know already he can't work with Republicans from his time as Governor and can't work with Democrats either on reasonable compromises. If Schweitzer wants to run as an Independent for President then fine because he'll continue to express how much he loves to criticize and screw over national Democrats, but don't run for President of the party you screwed out of a majority 2 years earlier. Just no.

He doesn't want to run for Congress. He does not like Congress. He does not want to be in Congress. He did not run because Daines was right on his heels anyway, and any shift in the national climate would have made him the underdog. He did not want to risk his resources on a job he does not want, and he didn't, because Brian Schweitzer is not entitled to the Democratic Party. Get over it.

You do realize that Schweitzer ran for Senate in 2000, right? And that was at a time when Republicans had the majority, wouldn't have had as much power, and would have had to make the controversial Iraq vote. He only lost to Burns by a couple of points while Bush won the state easily, so it's clear he wasn't discouraged. He would have been stupid of course to attempt to primary Baucus or face off against Rehberg for his House seat or contend the primary with Montana St. Senate Pres. Jon Tester and it's good he didn't. But when our party needed him......when our party needed another strong candidate like Tester in Schweitzer to run for this seat and save our majority, he'll take one for the team led by Tom Daschle, but not for Harry Reid? Obama and the Democrats managed to bypass that Schweitzer was extremely pro-gun and has some other controversial views, but this was a test of Schweitzer's actual trust to Democrats and he failed, miserably. If he ran for this seat and beat Daines (it probably would be a tossup, at least) and we held the majority, then he could have been considered a potential candidate for President if Hillary declined, but not anymore. Democrats gave Schweitzer the chances of a lifetime and made him a national figure before, so you're dang right he's entitled to owing back the Democratic Party.

[JerryArkansas]

Adam.

Not a fan of gun nuts and traitors of their party.

How is he a traitor? Is it because he didn't run for Senate? He has every right in the world to not run or run for whatever he wants.

He did it out of spite for his party you see

All of the polls suggested Schweitzer would win the Senate seat easily, yet he declined to run even before the 2 strongest Republicans, Daines or Racicot, made their decisions. Democrats gave Schweitzer not one, but two opportunities to speak at their convention and was considered a potential Obama VP pick in 2008 and this is the thanks Obama and Reid get. He knew our party was desperate when we looking to him when Baucus had to decline a run for re-election following his controversial background check vote and what did Schweitzer do instead? He declined and then when he found out that Bullock was going to appoint his Lt. Governor to the seat, recruited his own former Lt. Governor and got him to run as a Democrat to try and primary John Walsh (who has the backing of Tester, Baucus and other members of the Montana establishment) going as far to say that Bohlinger would crush the "DC bull" by a 2-to-1 margin. In fact, Schweitzer has yet to endorse Walsh even though Walsh worked in Schweitzer's administration and had no faith in Walsh against Bohlinger and has no faith in him against Daines.

While Walsh has been busy attacking Daines for his attacks on rape victims, veterans, Medicare recipients and outsourcing of jobs to China, Schweitzer wanted to have an intra-party fight more than anything else and it was just because Walsh took DSCC money and did a few fundraisers. In fact, these lies that Schweitzer wants to "avoid politics" nowadays are utter lies because he's a TV media darling nowadays and I've seen him repeatedly on MSNBC talking about a variety of political topics (in which case I turn the channel). He lives in luxury down in Texas now as a Montana corporate chairman and still believes he's a regular Montanan nonetheless. He even supports the pipeline which will hurt jobs IN Montana and yet he still has the audacity to attack other politicians like Walsh in the state for not being real Montanans. Also, if Schweitzer is supposedly not interested in being a Washington insider, then he shouldn't even be considering running for President. He'll have to work with a party whose establishment is upset with him and another party on the other end of his ideological spectrum and we know already he can't work with Republicans from his time as Governor and can't work with Democrats either on reasonable compromises. If Schweitzer wants to run as an Independent for President then fine because he'll continue to express how much he loves to criticize and screw over national Democrats, but don't run for President of the party you screwed out of a majority 2 years earlier. Just no.

He doesn't want to run for Congress. He does not like Congress. He does not want to be in Congress. He did not run because Daines was right on his heels anyway, and any shift in the national climate would have made him the underdog. He did not want to risk his resources on a job he does not want, and he didn't, because Brian Schweitzer is not entitled to the Democratic Party. Get over it.

You do realize that Schweitzer ran for Senate in 2000, right? And that was at a time when Republicans had the majority, wouldn't have had as much power, and would have had to make the controversial Iraq vote. He only lost to Burns by a couple of points while Bush won the state easily, so it's clear he wasn't discouraged. He would have been stupid of course to attempt to primary Baucus or face off against Rehberg for his House seat or contend the primary with Montana St. Senate Pres. Jon Tester and it's good he didn't. But when our party needed him......when our party needed another strong candidate like Tester in Schweitzer to run for this seat and save our majority, he'll take one for the team led by Tom Daschle, but not for Harry Reid? Obama and the Democrats managed to bypass that Schweitzer was extremely pro-gun and has some other controversial views, but this was a test of Schweitzer's actual trust to Democrats and he failed, miserably. If he ran for this seat and beat Daines (it probably would be a tossup, at least) and we held the majority, then he could have been considered a potential candidate for President if Hillary declined, but not anymore. Democrats gave Schweitzer the chances of a lifetime and made him a national figure before, so you're dang right he's entitled to owing back the Democratic Party.

That was the year 2000, a lot of sh**t can happen in 14 years.  He was tired of DC politics.  You look like a fool calling him a traitor for not running for a seat.  Instead of doing that, how about you go and win seats in states and stop complain. 

[free my dawg]

You do realize that Schweitzer ran for Senate in 2000, right? And that was at a time when Republicans had the majority, wouldn't have had as much power

Serving in Montana for eight years gives you more perspective.

and would have had to make the controversial Iraq vote.

Which would have been a no.

He only lost to Burns by a couple of points while Bush won the state easily, so it's clear he wasn't discouraged.

His run in 2004 would have told anyone that.

He would have been stupid of course to attempt to primary Baucus or face off against Rehberg for his House seat or contend the primary with Montana St. Senate Pres. Jon Tester and it's good he didn't. But when our party needed him......when our party needed another strong candidate like Tester in Schweitzer to run for this seat and save our majority, he'll take one for the team led by Tom Daschle, but not for Harry Reid?

And I'm pretty sure if you told Robert Byrd in 2000 that his state would become a Republican stronghold in five years he'd laugh his ass off. Lots can change in politics.

Obama and the Democrats managed to bypass that Schweitzer was extremely pro-gun and has some other controversial views.

Single-payer isn't controversial. The NSA is controversial to 90% of the country, but half of that 90% ignores it when their team's in power. Trust-busting isn't controversial either.

but this was a test of Schweitzer's actual trust to Democrats and he failed, miserably. If he ran for this seat and beat Daines (it probably would be a tossup, at least) and we held the majority, then he could have been considered a potential candidate for President if Hillary declined, but not anymore.

Not repeating myself.

Democrats gave Schweitzer the chances of a lifetime and made him a national figure before, so you're dang right he's entitled to owing back the Democratic Party.

He's not a national figure. He never was a national figure. Not every American is an Atlas poster, and only political junkies and Montanans know about him. He does not owe you or Harry Reid a Senate run, and holding that against him if he runs for president (instead of making a coherent argument about his views) is just dumb.

[LeBron]

You do realize that Schweitzer ran for Senate in 2000, right? And that was at a time when Republicans had the majority, wouldn't have had as much power

Serving in Montana for eight years gives you more perspective.

Naturally, a lot of Governors run for Senate afterwards and Senators will run for Governor to. No Montanans come to mind that did that, but there's plenty out there - Voinovich, Warner, Kaine, Crist, Risch, Hoeven, Rounds, Johanns, Musgrove, Talmadge, Fritz Hollings, Strom Thurmond, Manchin, Carper, Angus King, Shaheen and probably Hassan. The logic of Schweitzer wanting to run for President when it will be close to impossible for him to escape the primary to begin with rather than have a good 50/50 shot at Senate makes no rational sense especially when he says time and time again that he doesn't want anything to do with Washington. What he should have done was decline a run for President subsequently with a run for Senate if he really meant what he said about Washington.

and would have had to make the controversial Iraq vote.

Which would have been a no.

Not necessarily. The Democratic leadership, including Daschle, voted for the invasion and the 2002 view of the Iraq War is not the present-day view of it. Schweitzer may or may not have voted for it, but we'll never know for sure.

He would have been stupid of course to attempt to primary Baucus or face off against Rehberg for his House seat or contend the primary with Montana St. Senate Pres. Jon Tester and it's good he didn't. But when our party needed him......when our party needed another strong candidate like Tester in Schweitzer to run for this seat and save our majority, he'll take one for the team led by Tom Daschle, but not for Harry Reid?

And I'm pretty sure if you told Robert Byrd in 2000 that his state would become a Republican stronghold in five years he'd laugh his ass off. Lots can change in politics.

Montana isn't West Virginia, though. Montana's always been reliable for Republicans at the Presidential level (with the exception of the close race in 2008, LBJ/FDR/Wilson and the '92 split race) and on a statewide level for Senate as of recently, with the exception of Conrad Burns, its always elected Democrats. They're very independent and they loved Schweitzer and still like him. It wouldn't have been hard to have convinced MT voters what Walsh is doing now in calling out Daines on all of his unpopular conservative views. In fact, Schweitzer actually beat Daines before on the Roy Brown ticket!

Democrats gave Schweitzer the chances of a lifetime and made him a national figure before, so you're dang right he's entitled to owing back the Democratic Party.

He's not a national figure. He never was a national figure. Not every American is an Atlas poster, and only political junkies and Montanans know about him. He does not owe you or Harry Reid a Senate run, and holding that against him if he runs for president (instead of making a coherent argument about his views) is just dumb.

A lot of people were paying attention to Election 2008, political junkies and other people. It was the year of change where people were tired of Iraq and when economic conditions were growing worse with high Democratic optimism. Coincidentally, it was at this time that Schweitzer was the incumbent DGA Chairman in which under his leadership, we held nearly 60% of the Governorships. He wasn't entitled to a spot at the DNC, but he got one anyways from his support for Obama early on. 6 years later, he's turning his back on Obama. That's the definition of a traitor. I'm sorry.

[Flake]

En realidad, no esta contribuyendo a la Schweitzer "es un traidor" cosa. De hecho, usted esta ayudando a la gente que esta diciendo que el no tenia que correr. Solo quiero hacerles saber.

[free my dawg]

...

Atlas privilege is thinking that people still remember the Governor of Montana's speech at the DNC six years ago.

[windjammer]

And yep, he was a traitor.

He was really interested by that, that's why on his facebook he posted polls about him in the race.
And then he suddenly changed his mind.
This guy probably pressured Baucus to retire, he's the reason the democrats will lose a seat in Montana.

[Niemeyerite]

So now Schweitzer is a traitor because he didn't want to run for Senate. OK then. In the same way Steve Beshear, Sam Nunn, Jim Hood, Jay Rockefeller, Carl Levin and Ben Nelson are for not running, when they should have (against their criteria) just to help a party they've been helping for years.

The real traitor here is Ed Fitzgerald. He's no better than Alvin Greene. He's looks like a republican plant to make sure KaSick wins reelection. Jon Portune could have made the race competitive... Even Kucinich would stand a better chance than Fitzgerald. James Traficant looks good if compared with that irrelevant man FitzGerald.

[IceSpear]

So now Schweitzer is a traitor because he didn't want to run for Senate. OK then. In the same way Steve Beshear, Sam Nunn, Jim Hood, Jay Rockefeller, Carl Levin and Ben Nelson are for not running, when they should have (against their criteria) just to help a party they've been helping for years.

There's a pretty big difference between declining a run and someone who expresses interest, leads everyone on to the point where it's widely expected that it is a given he'll jump in, then pulling out at the last second.

[free my dawg]

Brian Schweitzer is a human being, not a slave to the Democratic Party. His path to the Senate seat is not laid out by the Yellow Brick Road, especially in an environment like this one. In fact, I would bet the farm that if he ran, Daines would be leading anyway. This seat was a tossup at best, even with Schweitzer, and I don't blame him for using his free will and not running for Senate.

I am done arguing this point. Sh*t happens. Get over it.