Whats the deal with Montana 08-12?

[Canis]

Obama went from losing it by 2.38% to losing it by 13.64%

[Arbitrage1980]

Obama went from losing it by 2.38% to losing it by 13.64%

Montana is a libertarian leaning state. Perot did extremely well there. So in 2008, due to the Iraq War and Bush's social conservatism, along with Ron Paul being on the ballot there as a write-in candidate, Obama managed to do well. But Obama's big-government liberalism, Obamacare, stimulus, did not resonate well with Montana in 2012.

[Canis]

Obama went from losing it by 2.38% to losing it by 13.64%

Montana is a libertarian leaning state. Perot did extremely well there. So in 2008, due to the Iraq War and Bush's social conservatism, along with Ron Paul being on the ballot there as a write-in candidate, Obama managed to do well. But Obama's big-government liberalism, Obamacare, stimulus, did not resonate well with Montana in 2012.

Paul only got 2.17% if you give McCain all of Pauls votes his lead would only go from 2.38% to 4.55% which is one third of Romney's lead of Obama in Montana

[Hydera]

Obama went from losing it by 2.38% to losing it by 13.64%

Montana is a libertarian leaning state. Perot did extremely well there. So in 2008, due to the Iraq War and Bush's social conservatism, along with Ron Paul being on the ballot there as a write-in candidate, Obama managed to do well. But Obama's big-government liberalism, Obamacare, stimulus, did not resonate well with Montana in 2012.

Also the collapsing national economy at the time and Obama having the outsider mantle.

In 2012 the economy didnt recover enough for there to be an argument for Obama in the state compared to 2008 so they reverted.

[SingingAnalyst]

Montana has long had an anti-incumbent streak. Eisenhower fared worse there in '56 than in '52. In 1972 Nixon got just 58% there. In 1980 Carter got just 32%. In 1988 Bush got just 52% and in 1992, 35%. In 2000, Gore got just 33%. In 2008 McCain got just 49%. And in 2016 Clinton did poorly there.

[Hydera]

Montana has long had an anti-incumbent streak. Eisenhower fared worse there in '56 than in '52. In 1972 Nixon got just 58% there. In 1980 Carter got just 32%. In 1988 Bush got just 52% and in 1992, 35%. In 2000, Gore got just 33%. In 2008 McCain got just 49%. And in 2016 Clinton did poorly there.

Interesting if theres a subset of voters in the state whose voting patterns is to vote for an anti-incumbent candidate.

[Sumner 1868]

There's also the fact Obama actually campaigned in Montana in 2008. So did Bill Clinton in the 90s and Dukakis. Showing up counts a lot in this state.

[TML]

Over the last 30 years or so, the only times where the Democrats won MT or lost it by less than 5% were 1992, 1996, and 2008. In each case, the Democratic candidate won 360+ electoral votes. Thus, it should not be terribly surprising that MT wasn't competitive in 2012 and 2016. If, in a future election, a Democratic nominee is on track to win 360+ electoral votes, then he or she would have a legitimate shot of winning MT.