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

[Tintrlvr]

Quist and Curtis are both lefty - Curtis was accused of being a psuedo-commie when she ran for Senate.

It didn't help that she had a video blog in which she mocked gun owners, talked sorta vulgarly about her "pansexuality" (the most white-girl thing I might have heard), and basically acted like an out an out caricature of a SJW.

So?

Serious question: what does pan sexual even mean? Is it just a fancier buzzword for bisexuality or is it honestly something different?

Pansexuals say that "bisexual" implies being attracted only to people who fit within one of the two traditionally defined sexes, but they are attracted to all people, including people who do not conform to traditional sex stereotypes. Some bisexual people will say, for example, that they are not attracted to feminine men even though they are attracted to feminine women and to masculine men, but a pansexual person by definition is attracted to feminine men as much as masculine men.

I think it is sort of silly, but you can definitely watch a bisexual person and a pansexual person have a serious argument about it.

[Tintrlvr]

Has a date for the election been set?

May 25.

[Tintrlvr]

I decided to run a GCS for this race as well and I got results in between Castro's and Cinyc's. They were,

Rob Quist - 48.4%
Greg Gianforte - 40.5%
Mark Wicks - 11.1%

I left out an "I won't be voting" option to maximize the amount of responses, so take this with an (extra) grain of salt. Here is the link to the actual survey.

It's definitely heartening that all three polls so far show Quist in the lead.

[Tintrlvr]

750k for someone like Quist isn't a bad haul at all. He'll obviously be outspent by a lot though.

Isn't that a fairly large amount for a congressional race?

Not for a special election. Ossoff has raised much more than that.

But again, I doubt it will matter much in the end.

GA-06 is in a pricy urban media market. But Ossoff has also raised way more than needed. $750k is plenty for Quist. Wouldn't hurt to have more but also wouldn't do much to help.

[Tintrlvr]

"We don't wanna give him money because it'll nationalize the race" is such a cop out.

WHICH IS SOMETHING REPUBLICANS DO ANYWAYS. They've already cut attack ads that portray Quist as a pawn of Pelosi.

It's because it doesn't fit their narrative. They want to win in GA-6 with Ossoff because it'll show that their "trade a blue collar vote for a white suburban vote" strategy was actually right all along, and having a populist win wouldn't contribute anything to that.

That wouod be a dumb strategy if their goal is to win.

The Bernie people can't get over feeling like it's all about them. Newsflash: Not everything is about you!

[Tintrlvr]

DCCC is sending another $400K to Montana for Quist, bringing total investment to $600K.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_590943b3e4b05c39768423fc

why

Seems approximately equal to my back-of-the-napkin guesstimation of what they invested in the GA-6, so it's probably to paper over reputational hit they've been taking on it.


I really wish they'd just given the state party the 600k when he won the nomination though.

[Tintrlvr]

Of course they're going to return more mail-in ballots when they're the most populated counties in the state. It's the percentage that counts, and that 29.86% number in Missoula and the 47.52% in Yellowstone don't really suggest good news for Quist.

I wouldn't read too much into this, though. Still interesting, of course, but Democratic or Republican turnout could be extremely high on election day.

It's also just percentage of requested ballots returned so far. Doesn't Missoula have a big student population? Young people tend to return absentee ballots much later in the process.

[Tintrlvr]

Waiting for this to actually show up here or other similar Montana news sources.

Too late regardless unless Quist was very, very close already. Most of the votes are already cast. If this really blows up it could force Gianforte not to take the seat and cause another special election, I suppose.

[Tintrlvr]

What's interesting is that I read other political forums and it hasn't even reached their yet. Weird.

Atlas breaks the story!

[Tintrlvr]

Wish we had video, but the audio is pretty damning.

[Tintrlvr]

That audio is pretty damning. Hope Jacobs is alright...

If he's still Tweeting, he's probably alright.  Not in the ICU, like the fake tweeters have been claiming.

ben hasn't tweeted since 1 hour.

He was apparently just interviewed (by phone) on MSNBC. So seems to be not badly injured at least.

[Tintrlvr]

Violent Greg cancelled his appearance on MTPDaily

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Seeking the safety of Fox News.

[Tintrlvr]

I assume we'll get a big dump of early votes within half an hour after polls close and then a slow trickle of day-of results after that. Typical pattern in rural states is that the tiny rural counties generally report early and cities (such as they are in Montana) report last, but don't know for sure if that is true of Montana.

[Tintrlvr]

Violent Greg cancelled his appearance on MTPDaily

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Seeking the safety of Fox News.

Canceled his appearance on Fox too

Fair enough.

[Tintrlvr]

Fivethirtyeight saw our polls https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/montanas-special-election-could-give-the-gop-another-reason-to-fret/

We've been acknowledged!!!!

Nate Silver and Harry Enten probably sh!tpost on here.

Plot twist: Harry Enten is Krazen

Ha. I have met Harry Enten personally (he dated a friend of mine for a while). Not creative enough to be krazen.

[Tintrlvr]

This is a horrifying result no matter how you slice it.

Something has gone horribly wrong in American politics, and I don't think it's going to get fixed any time soon.

I seem to recall an incident in 2006 where Conrad Burns attacked a group of out of state firefighters for "not doing enough" to help with the wildfires in the state.

Many thought it contributed to his loss, perhaps it did considering how close it was. But, Burns was trailing by 20 point and IIRC, subsequent polls to that incident showed Burns gaining ground.

I tend to think you are right to some extent, especially with regards to Montana as this is the second time that such unacceptable behavior, seemingly didn't play out the way it would have expected.

Or perhaps it is just coincidence.

Burns was not down by 20 points at any time. He was trailing, but the polls were very close, within single digits from all pollsters except a poll from Montana State University (dubious) and clustered in the 1-5 point lead for Tester range. I agree that some people attributed his loss to the firefighter comments, but whether those actually made a difference is hard to say. The polls didn't change much and more or less matched the final result.

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/SENATE/2006/polls.php?fips=30