I could be wrong, but it looks as though he took his foot off the proverbial pedal when he started to get double digit leads.
I can agree with this.
"F***ing awful candidate" is probably too harsh though.
It is.
I understand your frustration, but the odds really are stacked against Tester. The national climate isn't much help, as Bush remains relatively popular in Montana. Burns also benefits from his pork (the rest of his record ain't so great, but no one beats Conrad Burns when it comes to whoring for federal dollars).
Finally, he's closer to the state's mainstream than Tester is. Republicans are usually lying through their teeth when they claim that this or that Democrat is "too liberal" for their constituency, but in this case they may have a point. Turrurism and the Patriot Act don't help Crazy Conrad much, but the tax issue
does. Will it be enough to save ol' Burnsy? I don't think so, but it will be close.
I find it laughable that anyone could seriously consider a three-term incumbent Senator, running for reelection in a state heavily slanted toward his party, to be an "underdog."
Even
with his personal issues, this was Burns's race to lose (recall that most people thought he would coast to victory early in the year), and Tester has done very well overall.
Basically, you can chalk up the close race to the batsh
it nature of Montana itself. Tester can't change the state he's running in. 
Poll
