MT Senator race: Public Lands
- Thread starter Sytes
- Start date
Southern Elk
Well-known member
Sytes, you are correct that politicians change their stances from time to time. The problem that I have with Rosedale is the fact that he wasn't on the fence about PLT and public land issues. He was actively pursuing an anti-public land agenda. I do not believe him when he says he has changed.
Last edited:
Schaaf
Well-known member
I know he has “changed” his stance over the last couple years in pursuit of climbing further up the political ladder. I’m just asking for one example during his legislative career, not a dozen, just one.
Squaw Creek
New member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 9
The majority of you guys are fooled. You realize Tester has voted lock-step with Hillary, Obongo, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, & Maxine Waters on every single legislative item brought to him over the past 8 years?
A vote for Tester is a vote for the current radical left-wing Democrat party, which is destroying this nation from the inside-out. You can hide in your western Montana utopia for only so long until you wake up to what has happened to our nation. Ignorance is bliss for most western MT democrats who don't get out of the state much.
Call him what you want, but Maryland Matt is openly defending public lands. If he goes sideways on this, he'll be called out, drawn & quartered by his local party. And Maryland Matt is spot on in many other positions & issues impacting our nation, unlike fat cat Two-Faced Tester.
Time to FLUSH THE JON
Schaaf
Well-known member
Please stop. My stomach hurts from laughing.
Squaw Creek
New member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 9
Do you have any idea how much more money Tester has behind him than Rosendale at this point?
Squaw Creek
New member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 9
Laughing is often a welcomed coping mechanism for those living through cognitive dissonance.
In the words of Emperor Trump - WAKE UP PUNCHY!
Southern Elk
Well-known member
My comment was about money spent on the Republican primary. I think it was fairly obvious that most of the money spent in the primary was behind Rosendale.
Rancho Loco
Well-known member
Who voted for those trillion dollar deficits?
I 100% agree, MTMiller... If the only issue was PLT between Tester and Rosendale, Tester would be my vote, again.
This is not the case as we all know. Congressional seats, and other significant issues face all registered voters.
Each of us, the vocal ones within this post as well as those who read though do not post, (850 views, 10 posters(?)) decide their vote on partisan lines and (or) individual priorities. Right?
My posts have always shared Tester has the Public Land check mark. With Rosendale's past few years in support of public lands acknowledging his constituents interests, it's a matter of weighing the the priorities we each hold.
For myself;
It's a threat assessment of Tester filling a Democrat Congressional seat and major issues we face in Montana and Federal domestic / foreign issues.
It's a threat assessment of Rosendale's position on public lands. Outside of that, he fits my conservative leaning Independent interests in Montana and Federal domestic / foreign issues.
My interest here is how much a threat is Rosendale to public lands. His past few years have presented a supporter of public lands and reflects his statement a few years ago of listening to his constituent base.
My one hold on this thought... That takes Montana to 3 Republican House / Senate seats, 0 other party seat for representation. (Edit for clarification: I see little chance Williams will overcome Jersey G. She does not have my vote)
THIS LEAVES A SOUR TASTE. I like the checks and balance having Tester in the fray for this fact.
The aspects those who do not have public lands present as our #1 issue facing MT and Federal...
This is not the case as we all know. Congressional seats, and other significant issues face all registered voters.
Each of us, the vocal ones within this post as well as those who read though do not post, (850 views, 10 posters(?)) decide their vote on partisan lines and (or) individual priorities. Right?
My posts have always shared Tester has the Public Land check mark. With Rosendale's past few years in support of public lands acknowledging his constituents interests, it's a matter of weighing the the priorities we each hold.
For myself;
It's a threat assessment of Tester filling a Democrat Congressional seat and major issues we face in Montana and Federal domestic / foreign issues.
It's a threat assessment of Rosendale's position on public lands. Outside of that, he fits my conservative leaning Independent interests in Montana and Federal domestic / foreign issues.
My interest here is how much a threat is Rosendale to public lands. His past few years have presented a supporter of public lands and reflects his statement a few years ago of listening to his constituent base.
My one hold on this thought... That takes Montana to 3 Republican House / Senate seats, 0 other party seat for representation. (Edit for clarification: I see little chance Williams will overcome Jersey G. She does not have my vote)
THIS LEAVES A SOUR TASTE. I like the checks and balance having Tester in the fray for this fact.
The aspects those who do not have public lands present as our #1 issue facing MT and Federal...
Last edited:
noharleyyet
Well-known member
...the ones between '09 and '17?
RobG
Well-known member
No, even though the House, which sets the budget, was controlled by the GOP during most of the period, I think he is referring to the additional one made by the recent tax cut.
Squaw Creek, you are a nut if you think Tester is in "lock step" with Pelosi. Among other things, his bills are being signed by Trump. In fact, Trump unwittingly bragged about them at a rally for Rosendale.
Sytes, finding examples where Rosendale accepted land deals that happened to benefit hunters is a lot different than finding examples where he put public lands first over the wishes of special interests. But Matt is far worse than that - he has actively worked against public access. On the public land issue it is absurd to even suggest he is on our side at all. I know you like being a contrarian, but why the hell would an independent thinker even suggest Matt is comparable to Tester on this issue?
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Not real happy about either one of my choices here. For Tester to get my vote it hinges on his Supreme Court nominee vote. His voting record IMO has been poor when it comes to this part of his job. No different than the California "tuckfards". Paying close attention to this vote for what its worth. Suspect a lot Montana voters are as well.
Bold call prior confirmation hearings or maybe poor judgement on my part assuming you will require a vote of confirmation for Tester to get a shot at your vote.
Trump is the POTUS and based on that, he gets to make these selections. That being said, tough to make a call before hearings. Trump has, on occasions, made some very poor personnel decisions.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Not really a bold call. Saying that Tester's fate lies with this upcoming vote means that I am willing to give him a pass on his previous poor judgement when it comes to Supreme Court candidates. Kavanaugh is qualified. Should be an easy vote.
Probably. We shall see.
rtraverdavis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2016
- Messages
- 4,078
Obongo? Dude...
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Looks complicated. Voters or donors? We shall see.
https://www.bozemandailychronicle.c...cle_d1120623-974f-585a-91de-c0c92ecbcc9d.html
While Democrats are mostly right on the public lands issue, unfortunatly I am opposed to just about everything else they are for. As it pertains to Tester and Rosendale I don't like either one, but may have to hold my nose and vote for Rosendale. What turned me was Tester's torpedping of Ron Jackson. I happen to believe he was correct in that Jackson was not qualified, however the slimey way he went about it was wrong. That and the guy strikes me as a fat slob.
Last edited:
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I still can't believe there's actual montanan's who prefer a real estate developer from maryland over a wheat farmer from Montana, often while b!tchin' about coasties moving to montana.
