Tabled thread…

[MTGunner]

I had posted a thread inquiring information regarding Tim Sheehy’s conservative nomination for MT senator. BigFin tabled the post due to it going off the rails starting a foolish incident that had little to do with the original post. Thank you Randy.
I contacted Tim to get an answer about his views of public lands in the United States. Thus far I have received nothing but chin music with little content or answer to my direct question. His website asked me to support Tim albeit no answer to my question. This is troubling. I definitely would like to attend one of his debates with senator Tester/Testor. I find it that a direct question in front of an audience and cameras puts an individual on the spot. So far my emails have gone unanswered other than soliciting campaign funds.
BigFin and others, can you shed some light upon this? I am conflicted whether either are worthy. MTG Ha ha

 

[jimh406]

You won't find any politician you agree with all of the time unless you are running or don't know their positions.

You don't say how long ago you reached out to Sheehy. I'm assuming most politicians are pretty busy right now.

How long did it take for Tester to answer?

 

[MTGunner]

Did not receive anything from Tester. Sheehy’s website took four days. MTG

 

[MTGunner]

Apparently this is going nowhere. Thanks all. MTG

 

[SAJ-99]

Apparently this is going nowhere. Thanks all. MTG

I think someone provided a link in the other thread. Tester has been in the job long enough to give a clear view on where he stands. Sheehy, like Danies, is in a tough spot. Transferring Federal lands to the states is a core principle of the party, but they know the vast majority of citizens are against the idea. What you get in that case is a celebration of public land wins while chipping away at the edges- like wilderness classifications or O&G drilling. Tester will quickly find himself in the same spot with solar and wind. He has to be for “multi-use” even when it flies against the principle most people hold on public lands, which is retaining some “natural” state.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Sheehy came out initially with a statement supporting the transfer of federal public lands, much as Rosendale had at first. The difference is that Rosendale quickly realized how unpopular the transfer is with Montana voters so changed his position publicly. So far it has been radio silence from Sheehy after his initial statement.
Senator Daines, although supporting some worthy public lands legislation, has really cloaked his position on the "transfer" platform point. His reluctance to support the Montana popular Blackfoot Clearwater Stewardship Project is telling and has been reported widely as a disfavor to Montana public lands protection.

 

[MTGunner]

No answer/s from the Sheehy campaign office other than asking for my endorsement. I find their silence as an attempt to mask their true agenda. Have been a conservative voter for many years. Now, I am conflicted. I appreciate Sheehy’s Seal team efforts. But, a direct answer has not been forthcoming. MTG

 

[SAJ-99]

No answer/s from the Sheehy campaign office other than asking for my endorsement. I find their silence as an attempt to mask their true agenda. Have been a conservative voter for many years. Now, I am conflicted. I appreciate Sheehy’s Seal team efforts. But, a direct answer has not been forthcoming. MTG

It’s a difficult political tightrope for him to walk. I can certainly see him not wanting to put it in writing. I am getting the same problem from leading candidates here in WA regarding the structure of the commission.

Mark this post. The fiscal deficit is getting a lot of airtime. One thing someone like Rosendale or Daines and someone on the other end like AOC might agree on is selling some BLM to pay down debt. Most hard core NYC dems might see these western federal lands as disposable if it means paying for something they value.

 

[MTGunner]

Doubt AOC or any of their ilk would use the sold BLM funds to pay down debt. IMHO, I believe the socialist are attempting to bankrupt our republic to form another government. Another government in their view only.
Sheehy needs to be bold, answer questions and his campaign live or die with truthful answers. All it takes is some intestinal fortitude.
Sheehy, pay attention. Seals always improve their fighting position. MTG

 

[SAJ-99]

Doubt AOC or any of their ilk would use the sold BLM funds to pay down debt. IMHO, I believe the socialist are attempting to bankrupt our republic to form another government. Another government in their view only.
Sheehy needs to be bold, answer questions and his campaign live or die with truthful answers. All it takes is some intestinal fortitude.
Sheehy, pay attention. Seals always improve their fighting position. MTG

It is pretty clear where your vote is going, regardless of whether you get an email back or not.

 

[MTGunner]

The irony is that whether I am satisfied with Sheehy or otherwise you are correct. Flipping the senate to republican to oust Schumer is paramount. I cannot state that it makes me happy to do so. Grrrrrrr……..MTG

 

[Gr8bawana]

No answer/s from the Sheehy campaign office other than asking for my endorsement. I find their silence as an attempt to mask their true agenda. Have been a conservative voter for many years. Now, I am conflicted. I appreciate Sheehy’s Seal team efforts. But, a direct answer has not been forthcoming. MTG

Getting a direct answer from any politician R ir D is like finding a unicorn.

 

[jimh406]

From what I've found, the only "public transfer" suggested at all is potentially from federal to state control.

Frankly, I trust Montana State Govt more than the Federal Govt. You may disagree.

 

[rogerthat]

This is an easy one. If you’re a candidate running in Montana you should support public lands. The majority of Montanans do. I’m not sure why these rich out of staters don’t just lie about it even if they don’t. I think they are actually that out of touch with Montanans.

 

[Beignet]

This is an easy one. If you’re a candidate running in Montana you should support public lands. The majority of Montanans do. I’m not sure why these rich out of staters don’t just lie about it even if they don’t. I think they are actually that out of touch with Montanans.

Maybe testing the waters to see what the current appetite might be? Lots of things that would’ve ended a political career a decade ago are perfectly normal or at least tolerated by a lot of voters now.

But yeah, where Montana voters have historically stood on the issue hasn’t exactly been a big political secret.

Then again, Al Olszewski prominently featured a pro land transfer stance on his issues page and lost the primary to Zinke by only 2 points.

 

[warmer]

From what I've found, the only "public transfer" suggested at all is potentially from federal to state control.

Frankly, I trust Montana State Govt more than the Federal Govt. You may disagree.

Unfortunately, most states will never be able to afford to manage the transferred land and the most likely end result will be sell off to private owners.

 

[jimh406]

Unfortunately, most states will never be able to afford to manage the transferred land and the most likely end result will be sell off to private owners.

I don't think that logic follows unless it applies to the federal govt as well. The federal govt can't afford managing the land either.

 

[SAJ-99]

I don't think that logic follows unless it applies to the federal govt as well. The federal govt can't afford managing the land either.

They seem to do a decent job now. It could certainly be improved, but I wouldn’t call it a failure and any failures aren’t necessarily from management but failure to implement management which is usually a legal issue. Take a look at some state land trust sections for comparison. You want to vote that way it is up to you, but don’t come complaining when your spot gets sold to a corporate ranching conglomerate.

I have noticed these types of threads bring out members who post an average of 10 times per year and it always makes me wonder.

 

[Forkyfinder]

From what I've found, the only "public transfer" suggested at all is potentially from federal to state control.

Frankly, I trust Montana State Govt more than the Federal Govt. You may disagree.

State ran agencies dont have the infrastructure, resources, or expertise to do it - flatly. Additionally - it will turn it into a worse poltiical football game.

The prices of all uses of public land would have to skyrocket.

 

[jimh406]

We can disagree on if states or the federal govt is better at doing things.

At the end of the day, like many other things in political ads and by political operatives in articles, it is highly unlikely that any federal land sale or state transfer would ever happen. AFAIK, there isn't even a proposal with modest backing.