Montana 2008

[VPH]

The margin went from 20% to just over 2% to 13%. Why did Obama do so well in MT in 2008? Anti-war sentiment?

[Mr. Jew]

The margin went from 20% to just over 2% to 13%. Why did Obama do so well in MT in 2008? Anti-war sentiment?

Yes, and the GOP coming across as an ultra-authoritarian religious fundamentalist vehicle.  I swear, if Obama left out the "Guns" in his "God, Guns, and Gays" slipup he might've won the state.

[RI]

And, you, know, Ron Paul being on the ballot.

[Xing]

Montana is quite an elastic state, and very susceptible to large swings. Anti-Bush sentiment, Obama's early efforts in the state, and Ron Paul being on the ballot all helped Obama. In 2012, there was more anti-Obama sentiment, thus the large swing against him.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Montana was the last state (along with South Dakota) to cast its vote in the contentious Obama/Hillary primary, so Democrats there probably felt more motivated to turn out than Republicans. It was also the last state to vote for Obama in the primary, so perhaps they just had an affinity for him? I'm not really for sure. Even had Ron Paul not been on the ballot, you can assume most of his votes would have went to McCain, so instead of a ~2 point victory it'd be like a 3- or 4-point margin, which is still very impressive for a Democrat in Montana when the state did give Bush a 20-point spread four years earlier.

[Podgy the Bear]

And the presence of Governor Schweitzer--who was quite popular then and won re-election with a 2:1 margin--must have helped as well.

States like Montana and the Dakotas have had a good Democratic tradition at the statewide level.  Small and inexpensive media markets and solid organization provide that opportunity to elect Democrats at the state and local levels. 

Which I why I have always supported the 50-state strategy of Howard Dean (and now, hopefully, Hillary).  It's not easy but it can pay dividends.  George McGovern did exactly that in the 1950s--building an almost nonexistent Democratic party in South Dakota to substantial victories for several years to come.

[Sumner 1868]

Democrats running up good vote shares in Montana isn't without precedent.

1960
R: 51.1
D: 48.6

1988
R: 52.1
D: 46.2

1996
R: 44.1
D: 41.2

Montana was a relatively weak state for both Nixon and Reagan, the latter never winning 60 percent while the former just barely hit it in 1984. Gore and Kerry ran in elections were gun control was a top issue, which made them uniquely unlucky in the state.

[IceSpear]

The previous posters have explained "why" well, but I'd also like to add it wasn't a surprise at all. I believe PPP's final poll actually had Obama up a point there.

[Badger]

someone once said Montana tends to have an anti-incumbent (or incumbent party) voting streak in presidential elections. see the swing from 08 to 12 for an example, or 92 to 96.

[Badger]

Democrats running up good vote shares in Montana isn't without precedent.

1960
R: 51.1
D: 48.6

1988
R: 52.1
D: 46.2

1996
R: 44.1
D: 41.2

Montana was a relatively weak state for both Nixon and Reagan, the latter never winning 60 percent while the former just barely hit it in 1984. Gore and Kerry ran in elections were gun control was a top issue, which made them uniquely unlucky in the state.

Wow. I never realized Dukakis made MT such a relatively close race.

[blacknwhiterose]

VERY depressed turnout of the libertarian AR-toting vote in Montana for McCain. 

[TML]

Based on the results of elections in the past 25-30 years or so, I think Democrats have a legitimate shot of winning Montana if their nominee is on track to win at least 360-370 EVs in the general election. This is why Bill Clinton won Montana in 1992 (he won 370 EVs overall that year), while the losing margins in 1996 and 2008 were less than 5% (the Democratic nominee won 379 and 365 EVs overall, respectively, in those elections).