Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 03:42:06 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?		 « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?  (Read 4098 times)
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 04, 2015, 11:58:16 AM »
If Hillary wins the primary (unlikely because Bernie shall ruin that woman), but if she does, will Montana be put into play? Schweitzer has been talked about for veep, so do you think she'd pick him just to put Montana (and other moderate states for that matter) into play?
Logged
solarstorm
solarstorm2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,637
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM »
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,840
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2015, 12:18:20 PM »
No.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,356
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2015, 12:22:04 PM »
No.
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2015, 12:56:08 PM »
Schweitzer's only real pro is that he could make Montana close, as opposed to his trillion cons as a VP pick. Not worth 3 electoral votes.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,865
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2015, 12:57:03 PM »
No, Clinton is a bad fit for the state.
Logged
Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,720
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2015, 01:38:15 PM »
No, unless it's a democratic wave bigger than 2008 and/or Schweitzer is on the ticket.
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2015, 01:40:05 PM »
No
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,527
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2015, 01:41:30 PM »
« Edited: May 04, 2015, 01:59:31 PM by TDAS04 »
No.  If Obama couldn't win there, Hillary won't win there either.  (Unless a Montanan is on the ticket.  Then it would be competitive.)
Logged
Hydera
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,545


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2015, 04:25:49 PM »
#WetDream





Also




No.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,839
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2015, 04:37:43 PM »
NO!

Montana looks impressive on a map, but it is only three electoral vote. It is unlikely to matter, so I don't see anyone campaigning extensively in the state.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,102
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2015, 04:55:55 PM »
Only on Atlas...
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,804
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2015, 06:40:35 PM »
Should Connecticut?
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2015, 07:32:02 PM »
No.   It's too right leaning and too expensive to campaign in, especially for 3 electoral votes.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,095
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2015, 07:35:51 PM »
Logged
/
darthebearnc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,367
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 06, 2015, 01:59:17 PM »
Quote from: solarstorm on May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 06, 2015, 03:45:24 PM »
Quote from: solarstorm on May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.

All hot chicks at Fox News. Liberal women are ugly.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 06, 2015, 03:46:32 PM »
Quote from: bobloblaw on May 06, 2015, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: solarstorm on May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.

All hot chicks at Fox News. Liberal women are ugly.
What on earth does that have to do with anything?
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2015, 03:55:11 PM »
Quote from: Ebsy on May 06, 2015, 03:46:32 PM
Quote from: bobloblaw on May 06, 2015, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: solarstorm on May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.

All hot chicks at Fox News. Liberal women are ugly.
What on earth does that have to do with anything?

well at least you agree
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2015, 04:44:10 PM »
Quote from: bobloblaw on May 06, 2015, 03:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ebsy on May 06, 2015, 03:46:32 PM
Quote from: bobloblaw on May 06, 2015, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: solarstorm on May 04, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If Schweitzer is the VP nominee, definitely yes.
Otherwise no.

All hot chicks at Fox News. Liberal women are ugly.
What on earth does that have to do with anything?

well at least you agree

Huh
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,865
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 06, 2015, 05:29:13 PM »
Again, has anyone checked bloblo's IP?
He seems to me like a krazey sock.
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,140
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 06, 2015, 08:36:13 PM »
Re: Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?

It's the most underestimated state with potential to be won by a prevailing Democrat.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 06, 2015, 09:17:21 PM »
Quote from: DS0816 on May 06, 2015, 08:36:13 PM
Re: Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?

It's the most underestimated state with potential to be won by a prevailing Democrat.

Eh, it's not underestimated so much as no Democrat cares to try to win it. It has 3 measly electoral votes. Not worth it if you ask me, and it's trending R. I'd rather make a long term investment, rather than trying to wing a trending R state one time before it continues to trend R again (see: Indiana 2008, who in their right mind thought that was a worthwhile investment?).
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,140
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: May 06, 2015, 09:29:34 PM »
Quote from: DimpledChad on May 06, 2015, 09:17:21 PM
Quote from: DS0816 on May 06, 2015, 08:36:13 PM
Re: Should Montana be talked about as a swing state?

It's the most underestimated state with potential to be won by a prevailing Democrat.

Eh, it's not underestimated so much as no Democrat cares to try to win it. It has 3 measly electoral votes. Not worth it if you ask me, and it's trending R. I'd rather make a long term investment, rather than trying to wing a trending R state one time before it continues to trend R again (see: Indiana 2008, who in their right mind thought that was a worthwhile investment?).

Every state matters. It was winnable for Barack Obama in 2008. The problem is that the Democrats can leave too many states to the Republicans because they're not campaigning for them. In 2008 and 2012, respectively, Obama carried 28 and 26 states. Had he reached 30, with his first election, Montana would have carried. (Bill Clinton, with his first election in 1992, carried Montana with his 32 states.) And it would be foolish if the Democrats were to think that the 2012 map is their ceiling.
Logged
Clarko95 📚💰📈
Clarko95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,608
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -5.61, S: -1.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2015, 09:37:21 PM »
Montana seems like one of those states that becomes a swing state only when there's some kind of notable event (2008 environment, people mad at Bush and willing to give Obama a chance) or a significant third-party challenge (1990s).

Montana is too right-libertarian Presidentially for someone like Hillary 2016 or Obama 2012 that's established as a liberal, cosmopolitan Democrat.


On the Gubernatorial, U.S. Congressional, and state levels, however, it is definitely a swing state that Democrats should pay attention to to push their agenda, deliever legislature votes, and cultivate a candidate field.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.045 seconds with 14 queries.