Home | About | Donate

With No Love from DNC, Sanders-Backed Montana Longshot Surges


#41

The Russian Deza campaign on here is pretty blatant lately.


#42

Bernie will be here tomorrow stumping for Quist, had to move it to a bigger venue. Trump jr. and Pence have both been in the state for Gianforte though.


#43

You have any feeling on the outcome? I imagine it will be close. You think Bernie helps or hurts? Just curious, and hopeful.


#44

I hate to be a pessimist but I'm not sure he'll pull it off. I don't think the dems vetted him well enough. While the issues raised won't effect my vote, MT is a red state and they will ring with conservatives. Bernie was very popular here (speaking for Missoula County specifically) so might help? Tons of money poured into the airwaves to discredit Quist though. I wish the Trump/Russia investigation were farther along, it will rock this country when all the details finally come out and anyone tied to that will be radioactive.


#45

I live in Cali, but a very red part and work in an even redder part. I hear what you are saying, it's tough to break through. People don't get it here at CD, but if Bernie came to this district, he'd pack some rallies, but the candidate would probably lose even bigger. Add to that, the Koch fueled money machine is pretty much unparalleled. They can do in a week what it takes a candidate to do in a month.

Crossing my fingers for Quist.


#46

The outlier here is that Montanans have pretty good BS meters, sometimes, we may be predominantly red we may be conservative but there are critical thinkers here. Gianforte lost the race for governor last fall so I'm hoping that will happen again.


#47

Like I say, I'm crossing my fingers. Know very little about Quist, but he appears not to be the corporate stooge type like Gianforte.


#48

Quist isn't hiding the fact that he's a Democrat.


#49

I'm glad he's not too. My only point is sometimes, in some districts, it's better to be viewed as an "independent" type Democrat than affiliated strongly with the national party. The last Democrat in my district to nearly knock off my tea party congressman basically ran that kind of campaign. It's not wrong or right, just the way things go.


#50

There are people who say, get involved in dem party and change it from within. They don't want to be changed, they don't want to loose their billionaire donners. It is obvious.


#51

Perez and DNC are unable to kick their habit of corporate money and access to power. I've been a Dem for 40+ years but after the super delagate swindle of Bernie I'll not be in favor of any mainstream canidate.We need the power of past hunger and suffering in our canidate not silver spoons and privileged upbringing.


#52

What superdelegate swindle? I supported Bernie, but he did a crap-tastic job of pulling in his colleagues early. Obama provided the template. Instead, he basically threatened all of them with a crappy convention after he'd already lost.

This lie that Bernie ran this well-oiled campaign is delusional. Bernie made mistakes too, you know? One of his biggest was not trying to pull in his colleagues early, or at least having them hold out, like Obama did. Had he done that, pulled off a few big wins early (and started earlier altogether), the picture might have been different.


#53

Bernie's colleagues had put their eggs in Hillary's basket early on.

Quist's biggest mistake: not running as an Independent. He gets nothing from the D-Party label.


#54

And they ignored Thompson in Kansas. Makes me question the fact they are going "all out" for Jon Ossoff. Reading his history, I'm pretty sure he's (Ossoff) a corporatist, just like Clinton.

I'm a Democrat not a Corporatist!
I'm never again voting for the "lesser of two evils". If that means another Trump wins in 2020, that's not my problem. I'm telling the Democrats that if they want my vote in 2020, address my issues.

Isn't it amazing how the "progressive" talk show hosts talk more about how they have to "reach out" to Republicans rather than to true progressives.


#55

Bernie didn't run as good a campaign as Obama. That was his biggest problem. Had he started earlier, worked Democratic constituencies (who vote for elected democrats), and worked on his colleagues, I think things might've been different. Hillary started as a shoo-in against Obama too.

Water under the bridge anyway.


#56

Bernie beat Hillary in MT's Democrat primary election last June, and this is likely why the corrupt DNC/DNCC corporatists are now ignoring a progressive Democrat -- and Bernie supporter-- like Rob Quist...
Quist's opponent in this special election to fill Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke's former House seat, is a super rich, GOP religious fundamentalist & hi-tec entrepreneur -- Greg Gianforte -- who, despite his science-engineering background, spouts 7.000 yr old Earth creation nonsense while also mocking global warming science -- among much other right wing idiocy..
Gianforte is a shameless Trump myrmidon, and is loudly claiming that his campaign against Quist will be a bellwether on Trump's policies.
Since Trump won in MT last November by a big margin over Hillary, it's now anybody's guess how this too-close-to-call Quist vs. Gianforte "bellwether" election will go. One can only hope that earlier pro-Trump Montanans have come to their senses by now.......
.


#57

Randlieb, let's hope that doesn't happen or Quist will lose. It's time for Independent voices to come forward and free this country from the corporate interests of War and Zionism. That's the deadly duo doin' us in.


#58

Or, to put another way: Dems would rather lose to a republican than win with a progressive. They don't want Quist to win.


#59

Thank you for a simple but well-stated explanation for the lack of DNC support for this candidate. I admit to being puzzled by the strategy (or lack thereof) on the part of the Democratic establishment, but I'm not willing to resort to some of the crass, juvenile oversimplifications you see coming from some Berniecrats (God bless populism!).

That said, I do think the Dem establishment is trying to have it both ways. Cozying up to Wall Street then presuming to downplay the fact so as not to alienate Main Street only highlights an elevation of power and influence over principle. It appears duplicitous and appearances are everything in politics. Republicans are in power today because power and influence has become the principle of their party - it's a "big boy" game that Dems will always lose. There is no such duplicity with Republicans. (Their duplicity manifests in different ways I won't go into here.)

The Dem establishment had better wake up and take a (final?) stand on principle. If they can't even support worthy candidates in the field for fear of ruining their chances, then they need to either dramatically change strategy or disband. In other words, lead, follow, or get out of the way. These are pivotal and dangerous times. None of us can afford the luxury of dithering. It would be so much better if the party would embrace a vision for the future. So far, this is something that neither major party has been willing to try.


#60

"The indifference from Washington, D.C., is hard to square against the party's stated ideals for reviving its political fortunes..."

What kind of naiveté do we have to tolerate in our media? Or is this intentional? That is, when are we going to accept the fact that the Democratic party is the enemy just as much as the Republican party? We may be able to take it over but it will be a hostile takeover, forced by sheer numbers who threaten--and may have to carry out--an abandonment of the party if it doesn't willingly transform. There's no sign we have that many people who understand the system and problem of the corporate duopoly yet. We need to do more education by whatever peaceful means necessary.