Montana Primary???

buffybr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
1,166
Location
BozAngeles, MT
So it's getting down to the wire for sending in my Montana Primary Election Ballot. I've got most of it marked, but I don't have a clue about the candidates running for US Representative. Who is the best choice that would support us on Land, Wildlife, and Guns issues? (I will NOT vote for a democrat!!!)
 
So it's getting down to the wire for sending in my Montana Primary Election Ballot. I've got most of it marked, but I don't have a clue about the candidates running for US Representative. Who is the best choice that would support us on Land, Wildlife, and Guns issues? (I will NOT vote for a democrat!!!)
Mark McGinley is a pretty well rounded candidate. IMO, you would regret voting for any of the others if elected, with respect to public land, wildlife, and hunting issues.

Although mischaracterized and erroneously advertised by the Republican smear ads, Kathleen Williams is certainly not what you would expect from someone who (long ago) migrated from the west coast. Her positions on public land, wildlife, and hunting (and even most gun) issues are more favorable to Montana hunters / sportsmen / gun owners. Unfortunately she is a Democrat candidate, so there is that affiliation. Nowadays choices are not easy nor clear cut.
 
Thanks for your responses.

I think years ago there were some good politicians on both sides. Unfortunately, in recent years, regardless of what many politicians say when they are campaigning, when they get back to Washington, they vote their party line.
 
Thanks for your responses.

I think years ago there were some good politicians on both sides. Unfortunately, in recent years, regardless of what many politicians say when they are campaigning, when they get back to Washington, they vote their party line.

I'm puzzled then why you are fretting over your choice, if as you say,,,once in DC they vote their party line. I don't see a wide spectrum of thought regarding land use and wildlife on the GOP side. Once in DC, they are reliably pushing for more mineral, oil, and gas production on public land.
 
Mark McGinley is a pretty well rounded candidate. IMO, you would regret voting for any of the others if elected, with respect to public land, wildlife, and hunting issues.

Although mischaracterized and erroneously advertised by the Republican smear ads, Kathleen Williams is certainly not what you would expect from someone who (long ago) migrated from the west coast. Her positions on public land, wildlife, and hunting (and even most gun) issues are more favorable to Montana hunters / sportsmen / gun owners. Unfortunately she is a Democrat candidate, so there is that affiliation. Nowadays choices are not easy nor clear cut.
I have known and worked with Kathleen for a number of years. She is a good person who genuinely wants whats best for the state. She worked at FWP during a point in her career. She is also a bird hunter and fisherman (and not just the photo opp kind).
 
I'm puzzled then why you are fretting over your choice, if as you say,,,once in DC they vote their party line. I don't see a wide spectrum of thought regarding land use and wildlife on the GOP side. Once in DC, they are reliably pushing for more mineral, oil, and gas production on public land.
Re-read my post: "regardless of what many politicians say when they are campaigning, when they get back to Washington, they vote their party line." Me not knowing any of the GOP House candidates, I was hoping someone would know if any candidate was more land, wildlife, and gun friendly than the others.

Not all mineral, oil, and gas production on public land is necessarily bad:
The area in western Colorado where I shot my Mountain Lion was heavily explored for uranium years ago. Today there is little evidence of that exploration other than some open roads and some grown-in wheel track type roads.

The unit that I hunted antelope in the Red Desert area of Wyoming had more large bucks than any unit in Montana that I have ever hunted. Access in that unit was available from many oil production roads to many working wells.

One area in SE Montana that I've hunted antelope in for a half dozen or more years, had a big crew putting in a 30" diameter oil pipeline one year. When I went back there a couple of years later, the pipeline was buried, the ground re-contoured and seeded, and if I hadn't seen them putting it in, I wouldn't have known it was there.

And the list goes on...
 
I am glad that in the general election we aren’t limited to voting for one party’s candidate.

It definitely can be difficult to advance quality candidates in the primary when the individual choices are between bad and worse. Equally difficult is know the difference in character and policies of relatively unknown candidates in the primary.
 
I went with Dooling. I've heard him speak a number of times on the local Missoula morning radio show and he comes across as somewhat down to earth.

 
Re-read my post: "regardless of what many politicians say when they are campaigning, when they get back to Washington, they vote their party line." Me not knowing any of the GOP House candidates, I was hoping someone would know if any candidate was more land, wildlife, and gun friendly than the others.

Not all mineral, oil, and gas production on public land is necessarily bad:
The area in western Colorado where I shot my Mountain Lion was heavily explored for uranium years ago. Today there is little evidence of that exploration other than some open roads and some grown-in wheel track type roads.

The unit that I hunted antelope in the Red Desert area of Wyoming had more large bucks than any unit in Montana that I have ever hunted. Access in that unit was available from many oil production roads to many working wells.

One area in SE Montana that I've hunted antelope in for a half dozen or more years, had a big crew putting in a 30" diameter oil pipeline one year. When I went back there a couple of years later, the pipeline was buried, the ground re-contoured and seeded, and if I hadn't seen them putting it in, I wouldn't have known it was there.

And the list goes on...

Any of them should fill your bill. They will vote 99% the same way if they get to DC. I distain Rosendale, he might be more to your liking thou.

I voted in the GOP primary,, to try get Fox instead of Gianforte on the November ballot. I left the house race blank.
 
Any of them should fill your bill. They will vote 99% the same way if they get to DC. I distain Rosendale, he might be more to your liking thou.

I voted in the GOP primary,, to try get Fox instead of Gianforte on the November ballot. I left the house race blank.
So you crossed over to vote against Gianforte, but didn't vote against Rosendale who you distain. Weird. Can't believe Rosendale is paying good money to run that cringeworthy ad of his.
 
As far as William's goes, when she first started campaigning she ran as a Berkeley liberal, but as the campaign progressed, she transformed into a moderate. I do believe her transformation was genuine. She listened and learned from Montana people she talked to along the way. Can she convince me she is not going to be a rubber stamp for Nancy? That will be hard to do, but she will have to, to get my vote.
 
So you crossed over to vote against Gianforte, but didn't vote against Rosendale who you distain. Weird. Can't believe Rosendale is paying good money to run that cringeworthy ad of his.

I might of voted for the woman,,,can't remember,,getting old. She obviously won't win the primary,,, even if I might have voted for her.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
111,053
Messages
1,945,065
Members
34,990
Latest member
hotdeals
Back
Top