Is Montana a good place for conservatives? (state, whole)

[Montguy]

Originally Posted by historyfan

Really? I've held positions in MT Democrats and I've voted for several Republican presidential candidates. I refuse to vote for a dynasty candidate, so this year I will vote Republican.

Yes, really. I voted for Libertarian Gary Johnson in the 2012 presidential race, and I disagree with at least half of his party's platform. That vote doesn't make me a (L)ibertarian in the partisan sense, or an acceptable libertarian in a broader sense where I apply that ideology to every issue.

And I'll vote for Trump, too. He isn't a conservative (neither am I), he's a non-traditional Republican, he has the right enemies across the spectrum, and he has them for the right reasons. Democratic partisans and hard-line lefties will nonetheless not be voting for him, and furthermore, in Montana's case, I'll estimate that Clinton will receive right about 40% of the vote. Protest votes from Montana conservatives/Republicans will, I'm guessing, be thrown to the Libertarian candidate or will be cast as write-ins for Cruz.

Originally Posted by movintime

Liberals & Montana or Idaho should be an oxymoron or.. just plain moron if you ask me. How can you of sound mind (well there's the 1st prob) move or live yrs there & vote dem? Makes zero sense. Both parties are sellouts, I agree, yet at least conservative thinking should far out distance liberals.

If not, as I think is the case, this country is really in an unreal cond. Oh well, I stand my ground but why are too few holding their ideals of "A Founding Dad's beliefs" as their credo? Hmm, back to my wine...

I just think it's really awesome when transplants/non-residents (whichever one you are) determine what beliefs and values should and should not be acceptable for Montanans who actually live in Montana, some perhaps for much or all of their lives. As well, I'm just curious: Is "movintime", by any chance, a kind of euphemism for "carpetbag MT"? (Please GOD, not another one.)

Also, do educate yourself as to what the political histories of Idaho and Montana actually are. Militant, derailed GOP politics, whether they masquerade as conservative, constitutionalist, whatever, are pretty new developments in both places; ID since about the mid-late-90s, and in Montana's case, since the beginning of Obama's presidency. Outsiders (as in newcomers) have been very helpful in fomenting that...especially for poor Idaho.

[Montguy]

Originally Posted by ericsvibe

There are plenty of ultra socialist democrats in this state. The good thing is that most of them don't even bother to vote. But believe me, they have the same star eyed, naïve view of the world. One co-worker I have to deal with says some of the most outlandish things you could ever think of, and believes every word of it. Some of her thoughts, climate "deniers" should be imprisoned by the government. The government should seize all guns and dangerous weapons to protect "children" from ignorant parents. Hunting and fishing are animal cruelty, and consuming meat should be illegal. Dress code standards are "racist, and patriarchal", and are only used by the rich to keep the poor out of employment. I could go on and on. The worst part is this woman is a senior manager in the building, and has a very thorough education.

Voter apathy and ineffective outreach from Montana Democrats are two significant factors aiding the successes of Montana Republicans over these last few years. If more progressives were turning out in the generals, and if more true libertarian-oriented/moderate voters were turning out for the GOP primaries, then Montana government would be missing a lot of whackos.

[movintime]

Mont, correct on several accts but apathy on conservative "cat-in-bag" mindset, of not needing to even cast a vote amongst so many conservative folk, deludes the party votes.

If you don't vote (ok, my true feeling is they DO NOT count anyway but... due to manipulation which is now rampant in gov't elections -- & no way can anyone really account for what or who does what in vote tallies). W/ this undermining of US, the evisceration of the Fore Father's beliefs via the circumventing of the Constitution -- how can anyone back liberal stances?

Here's the thing, no prob if you agree w/ libs but please move to Columbia, or Venezuela -- or better yet -- find your new home there amongst such happy people already basking in prosperity & happiness in those wonderful, vacation-ideal, lovely, scintillatingly, marvelous countries (please pass the whiskey so I can finish this comment ).

If you're a Christian, etc. then why on earth would gay marriage, abortion, etc. even be allowed in your vote ideals? They are a clear basteridization of the Christian faith/Catholic church & hate to say -- but our Pope has sold out -- but again, he's from S. Am & that is unreal, yet what's to be expected.

Yes I know, controversial but I think spot on & thus the reasoning for these comments.

[Montguy]

@movintime

Lots of liberals and left-leaners will vote for Trump. I don't think it'll be close to a majority of us by any stretch, but I also think it's safe to say that many of us are very uncomfortable with the theft of liberalism by cultural totalitarians (especially those who accuse us of conservatism) and will vote accordingly against such a person for the highest office in the country.

But I'm voting straight-Dem starting from the At-Large congressional race on down. I can't have you being unaware of that.

[Senah]

I have to really disagree. I think there are certainly many citizens/Montanans who vote and align with national Republican values but usually vote and support Democrats within the state. Beyond anecdotally (several of us knowing people like that or even personally being of that vein), a great example is the stream access law. A second would be the petitions and support of corner crossing when hunting and recreating (a phenomenon that locks citizens out of millions of acres of public land). Republicans across the board in the state have not only not been supportive of stream access and corner-crossing, many of them have acted against it. I know plenty of people who really personally align with Republican federal/national agendas and vote Republican in those elections, but at a state level care a LOT about public access to public land, and therefore vote Democrat. These aren't the only two issues like that, but they certainly stand out as well known and I think count for a lot of votes.

[Montguy]

Originally Posted by Senah

I have to really disagree. I think there are certainly many citizens/Montanans who vote and align with national Republican values but usually vote and support Democrats within the state. Beyond anecdotally (several of us knowing people like that or even personally being of that vein), a great example is the stream access law. A second would be the petitions and support of corner crossing when hunting and recreating (a phenomenon that locks citizens out of millions of acres of public land). Republicans across the board in the state have not only not been supportive of stream access and corner-crossing, many of them have acted against it. I know plenty of people who really personally align with Republican federal/national agendas and vote Republican in those elections, but at a state level care a LOT about public access to public land, and therefore vote Democrat. These aren't the only two issues like that, but they certainly stand out as well known and I think count for a lot of votes.

Senah. For the last time:

There are partisan Democrats, liberals, leftists and, frankly, even socialists in Montana who do not align with Republicans or conservatives at all. There will be people in life whose values and priorities will be much different from yours, and your own confirmation biases won't change that. Good night.

[Reziac]

Classical liberalism and Democrats typically align poorly; however Democrats and the Authoritarian Left tend to align well. This is why it croggles me that a self-professed classical liberal can vote mostly Democrat.

As to "progressives", that philosophy necessarily implies and endorses growth of government power -- how else are you going to enforce progressive doctrine? ("So good, it has to be mandatory.")

[Montguy]

Originally Posted by Reziac

Classical liberalism and Democrats typically align poorly; however Democrats and the Authoritarian Left tend to align well. This is why it croggles me that a self-professed classical liberal can vote mostly Democrat.

As to "progressives", that philosophy necessarily implies and endorses growth of government power -- how else are you going to enforce progressive doctrine? ("So good, it has to be mandatory.")

Maybe you aren't referring to me personally here, but I suspect that you are, and so I'll clarify that I'm not a classical liberal and never claimed to be. Social libertarian, economically pragmatic; generally fine with a role for government in healthcare, education, labor relations, conservation; social safety nets are okay, but reforms are needed; flat taxation is a good compromise. Major themes would include nationalism, anti-Atlanticism, anti-globalism, civil libertarianism, secularism, anti-interventionism.

Progressives often have the best answers, sometimes they don't, and sometimes there's an even better third way. I can have my position, say on healthcare, and then I can have my position on, say, the Second Amendment, and one doesn't have to have anything to do with the other.

Ideologues don't like me. I'm totally cool with it.

[Senah]

Originally Posted by Montguy

Senah. For the last time:

There are partisan Democrats, liberals, leftists and, frankly, even socialists in Montana who do not align with Republicans or conservatives at all. There will be people in life whose values and priorities will be much different from yours, and your own confirmation biases won't change that. Good night.

[EastCoastRefugee2]

The political discussion(s) here are -- uhm -- fascinating

just sayin'