Nov 3 - Independents’ Day?

[SAJ-99]

Should we just make you king, since your positions are superior? Are you surprised people have different opinions or am I misinterpreting?

No not surprised. Happy that people can have different options in this country, at least for now. Just find it interesting that two opposing opinions end us up with a bigger, but different problem.

Party doesn’t matter and won’t. People need to vote for high character individuals regardless of party. Those are in short supply in politics and even if they exist the system quickly paints them as the “enemy”. Bodnar seems like a person with integrity. However, even if he was elected, in two years he would take so much flak he wouldn’t want the job anymore. Trump won Montana by 20pts.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Trump won Montana by 20pts.

Skewed perspective from a purple Bozeangelos area, but nationally Trump's support has been waning due to a wide variety of noted misjudgments on his part which have been adversely submarining any purported efforts at "making America great". As pointed to above, it is unfortunate that the staunch D voters will split votes away from an otherwise Independent candidate who would have had a shot, according to the mathematics of political pundits.

 

[Bonasababy]

I've talked about this before. People complain about the parties, but fewer and fewer take part in them to advocate for change.

I'm not talking about voting in the general election.

I'm talking about attending a party caucus, voting within the party.

Both parties tend to be run by the extremes because moderates--heck even people that don't give power to fake issues and conspiracies or pie in the sky changes with no concern for their impact--do not take an active role in the party.

You can say indepenedents are the answer but that is no panacea either. I give you:

He did have some of the best political ads ever though...

He actually was pretty close to a die hard libertarian, and had some really good moderate staff members with solid ideas--from both parties...just couldn't get out of his own way and keep his foot out of his mouth.

Context at the time was a couple of classic old school politicians being run by the two major parties and a voting public tired of the same old.

Also--polls at the time had him trailing by a fair amount. The vote was split three ways, but they had him in the mid 2o % range. He won with 37%. HUGE younger voter turnout made a big difference for him.

So don't lose hope. .

 

[cgasner1]

Kinda bullshit I have to put a stamp on it to mail it in.

 

[jimh406]

There isn't a perfect answer, but there are plenty of answers. The only politician we would agree with 100% of the time would be us if we ran. Otherwise, we win some and lose some.

If that site was right, we are up over 18 million spent on Montana Senate campaign. Sure, it's possible that people who donated millions to their candidate don't want anything in return, and the candidate will always do the right thing.

But, politics doesn't quite work that way. I'll think it's more like I'll vote for your "bill" if you vote for mine no matter if they are Rs, Ds, or Is. Sometimes, they support bills knowing it's not going to pass, so they can campaign on it to raise money.

You can pretend a candidate has integrity ... but I call it politics which is something else entirely.

 

[SAJ-99]

Skewed perspective from a purple Bozeangelos area, but nationally Trump's support has been waning due to a wide variety of noted misjudgments on his part which have been adversely submarining any purported efforts at "making America great". As pointed to above, it is unfortunate that the staunch D voters will split votes away from an otherwise Independent candidate who would have had a shot, according to the mathematics of political pundits.

Agree. Why is he not splitting off any meaningful % of R voters? (At least in the polls. Maybe Election Day will be different?)

I have said since the start that Dems will get the blame for this. But both sets of voters are slaves to their party loyalty. Objective thought is dead.

 

[SAJ-99]

I've talked about this before. People complain about the parties, but fewer and fewer take part in them to advocate for change.

I'm not talking about voting in the general election.

I'm talking about attending a party caucus, voting within the party.

Both parties tend to be run by the extremes because moderates--heck even people that don't give power to fake issues and conspiracies or pie in the sky changes with no concern for their impact--do not take an active role in the party.

You can say indepenedents are the answer but that is no panacea either. I give you:

He did have some of the best political ads ever though...

He actually was pretty close to a die hard libertarian, and had some really good moderate staff members with solid ideas--from both parties...just couldn't get out of his own way and keep his foot out of his mouth.

Context at the time was a couple of classic old school politicians being run by the two major parties and a voting public tired of the same old.

Also--polls at the time had him trailing by a fair amount. The vote was split three ways, but they had him in the mid 2o % range. He won with 37%. HUGE younger voter turnout made a big difference for him.

So don't lose hope. .

He was a vanguard of the current era of celebrity in politics. That kind of makes me wonder if anyone without some celebrity persona will ever win the presidency. Even politicians are trying to craft some type of celebrity profile.

Lots of people registered for 2028. Lots of Ind, lots of No party. The result of the internet and social media?

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_registered_2028_presidential_candidates#Registered_2028_presidential_candidates