Why has Montana frequently voted Democratic statewide, but not for president?

[I’m not Stu]

Why has Montana elected many Democratic governors and Senators, while being solidly GOP at the presidential level?

[walleye26]

Historically, Montana has had a more union background coupled with a sort of libertarian streak. Also, because of the state’s low population, retail politics were a lot more effective. The Democrats in Montana are more pro-gun statewide, and more conservative on some social issues (though some libertarianism mixed in). This meant the Democrats statewide had a lot of wiggle room, but the national party is not a good fit.

[I’m not Stu]

Historically, Montana has had a more union background coupled with a sort of libertarian streak. Also, because of the state’s low population, retail politics were a lot more effective. The Democrats in Montana are more pro-gun statewide, and more conservative on some social issues (though some libertarianism mixed in). This meant the Democrats statewide had a lot of wiggle room, but the national party is not a good fit.

You mean Montana Democrats tend to be more moderate, like Jon Tester and Steve Bullock?

[SInNYC]

Historically, Montana has had a more union background coupled with a sort of libertarian streak. Also, because of the state’s low population, retail politics were a lot more effective. The Democrats in Montana are more pro-gun statewide, and more conservative on some social issues (though some libertarianism mixed in). This meant the Democrats statewide had a lot of wiggle room, but the national party is not a good fit.

You mean Montana Democrats tend to be more moderate, like Jon Tester and Steve Bullock?

Only if liberal is defined by guns and social issues. I'd say they are center-left of the national party on economic issues.

[I’m not Stu]

So Montana Democrats are more moderate on social issues?

[walleye26]

So Montana Democrats are more moderate on social issues?

Depends how you define it. You could say more moderate, but I would argue more libertarian-ish. Bullock is pro-choice and supports LGBT rights, and wants to rejoin the Paris agreement. He also supports Medicaid expansion and DACA.

[I’m not Stu]

So Montana Democrats are more moderate on social issues?

Depends how you define it. You could say more moderate, but I would argue more libertarian-ish. Bullock is pro-choice and supports LGBT rights, and wants to rejoin the Paris agreement. He also supports Medicaid expansion and DACA.

Is this how Montana Democrats have been historically?

[TDAS04]

As a state, Montana is clearly more libertarian than not.  Way back in 2004, voters approved medical marijuana with 62%.  I’d imagine that Montana Democrats are particularly supportive of civil liberties, while the state’s Republicans are primarily focused on gun rights and conservative economic policies.

[Sol]

Montana also has a higher floor--there are the reservations, Missoula, and to a certain extent Butte.

[Indy Texas]

Conversely, the Montana GOP doesn't seem to be as competent a party or as good at candidate recruitment.

They could conceivably have picked off Tester in 2012 or 2018 if they'd had better candidates/campaigns.

In 2008, they let their ballot line for the other Senate seat get taken over by Bob Kelleher, a gadfly perennial candidate who used to be a Democrat and a Green and ran on a platform to the left of Max Baucus.

Greg Gianforte was elected to Congress but basically brings nothing to the table other than an ability to self-fund his campaigns.

[voice_of_resistance]

Conversely, the Montana GOP doesn't seem to be as competent a party or as good at candidate recruitment.

They could conceivably have picked off Tester in 2012 or 2018 if they'd had better candidates/campaigns.

In 2008, they let their ballot line for the other Senate seat get taken over by Bob Kelleher, a gadfly perennial candidate who used to be a Democrat and a Green and ran on a platform to the left of Max Baucus.

Greg Gianforte was elected to Congress but basically brings nothing to the table other than an ability to self-fund his campaigns.

And an ability to "crush" his opposition