Skip to main content

View Diary: All right, I'll support Brian Schweitzer if he runs for Max Baucus's Senate seat (15 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  other Dems may be interested (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    including Denise Juneau, a Native woman who won the Superintendent of Public Instruction spot in 2012; who spoke to the DNC; and - most important in my mind - voted against the Otter Creek coal lease.

    Why support a pro-Keystone XL, pro-coal candidate?

    Do the math. #unfrackCal. @RL_Miller

    by RLMiller on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:22:42 PM PDT

    •  because it's Montana (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      For Dean in Dixie

      and most people there probably support it.  He's as popular as he is because he supports coal, because coal is important to that region economically.  As with every Democrat, so long as they're good on other issues, I am willing to forgive any differences I may have with them on issues of particular concern for their state.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:59:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Juneau may try to run for U.S. House (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      That office (also statewide, as Montana has only one House seat) is currently held by Republican Steve Daines, who is reportedly considering entering a Republican U.S. Senate primary field that already has two candidates who have announced their intention to run. Let's not forget about Montana having a GOP-held House seat that is winnable with a strong candidate.

      Schweitzer is such an institution in Montana that I highly doubt that any Democrat would consider running in a primary against him.

      Progressive first, Democrat second

      by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:11:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's sad that you need it explained to you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      high uintas, For Dean in Dixie

      "Why support a pro-Keystone XL, pro-coal candidate?"

      To put it another way:
      "Why support a candidate with which you'll agree on 90% of issues and who will probably win, versus a pure-as-the-driven-snow candidate (who won't actually be pure on the off chance she wins -- they never are -- but let's just click your ruby slippers together and pretend, for the sake of the discussion) who will probably lose?"

      Politics is the art of the possible. Tilting at windmills is for people who prefer warm fuzzies to accomplishments.

      •  well... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zett, PhilK, unfangus

        1. You assume that Schweitzer will probably win and Juneau will probably lose. The only recent polling I've seen on hypothetical matchups, in Feb., didn't even include her at all, but if you have any evidence that she'd probably lose beyond "it's Montana," please let me know.

        2. You might weight lots of different issues equally, which is your prerogative.  I consider climate change to be the greatest challenge facing humanity's next few generations, and am not giving my time, money, or enthusiasm to those who pick fossil fuel interests over humanity.

        And the patronizing/insulting "it's sad that you need it explained" is noted.

        Do the math. #unfrackCal. @RL_Miller

        by RLMiller on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:28:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Looking at things realistically (0+ / 0-)

      about half of liberal Dems support XL, that's nationwide, according to Pew. To win in MT you need a lot of indies.

      Montana, even the other side of your state, is very different from the coast of CA. Supporting unpopular postions can lose elections.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Wed Apr 24, 2013 at 06:16:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site