Zinke (R) vs Juneau (D) (Montana)

[Shotgun1]

I saw a post a while ago asking Montana voters stance on Gianforte vs. Bullock. I was just wondering what people thought of this congressional race. My thought is this, I have been Republican most my adult voting life until now...If anyone has any doubt of their stance on public lands read the 2016 Republican Platform (end of page 20 to page 21). They talk about transfer to states but they also say the best thing is the privatization of public lands.

Juneau vows to protect public lands. I will be going with her for the fact that Zinke is a Republican and their current platform. I worry he will one day go with the rest of the party line and their ideas to steal/rape/privatize MY, OUR, YOUR public lands.

 

[MTGomer]

I'm going to vote for Bullock but also will be voting for Zinke.
He has never given any indication that he supports transfer and speaks out against it, against his own party and even against his own self interest.

He has worldly experience commanding SEAL team 6, is very personable and approachable to his constituents.

Fortunately for Montana I don't think either of them are bad candidates. Very rarely these days do we get to vote for someone instead of against someone. It doesn't seem like this is a choice between the lesser of two evils for once.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I agree; both Juneau and Zinke are good candidates. The concern is that for Zinke to achieve his aspirations ... Speaker of the House, Cabinet member, or whatever ... he will need to support the Republican agenda. A clearly stated Republican national platform plank is transferring federal public lands to the states. How will he avoid adhering to that agenda and still be a strong Republican at the national level?

 

[Nemont]

In order for Zinke to climb the ladder of higher office he has to be able to keep getting elected. I just don't see a highly visible pro lands transfer Congressman or Senator from Montana doing well in an election in Montana.

Zinke is going to beat Juneau, probably by a decent margin. I believe even Juneau would admit this in a moment of candor. She is positioning her self for a 2018 house run if Zinke is going to set up to challenge Tester. If that happens as it appears likely Juneau will have an advantage in the House 2018 house race. Just look at their fund raising numbers, Zinke is raising ungodly amounts of money, even though the national party thinks the race may be competitive the democrats have not opened the wallets to Juneau in a way that make one think that they truly believe she can win.

Nemont

 

[Shotgun1]

I agree; both Juneau and Zinke are good candidates. The concern is that for Zinke to achieve his aspirations ... Speaker of the House, Cabinet member, or whatever ... he will need to support the Republican agenda. A clearly stated Republican national platform plank is transferring federal public lands to the states. How will he avoid adhering to that agenda and still be a strong Republican at the national level?

My thoughts exactly. He has not voted against my public lands YET, but how long until he falls in line with his party's platform. That is my concern.

 

[onpoint]

My thoughts exactly. He has not voted against my public lands YET, but how long until he falls in line with his party's platform. That is my concern.

His party's platform - look into the sale and transfer of public lands.
His voting record on public lands issues so far isn't exactly stellar, if I'm not mistaken. His intentions are unclear.
As stated in an earlier political thread "no minds are changed". Including mine, I've no concerns about voting for him - as I'm not.

Looking forward to being in antelope camp (on United States public lands) one week from right now. No media of any type whatsoever for five days.

 

[Shotgun1]

His party's platform - look into the sale and transfer of public lands.
His voting record on public lands issues so far isn't exactly stellar, if I'm not mistaken. His intentions are unclear.
As stated in an earlier political thread "no minds are changed". Including mine, I've no concerns about voting for him - as I'm not.

Looking forward to being in antelope camp (on United States public lands) one week from right now. No media of any type whatsoever for five days.

I have looked into his party's platform, which is why I am going with Juneau

 

[Ben Lamb]

His party's platform - look into the sale and transfer of public lands.
His voting record on public lands issues so far isn't exactly stellar, if I'm not mistaken. His intentions are unclear.

Unfortunately, this is true. Congressman Zinke has voted on the easy stuff like transfer & LWCF correctly most of the time, but he's also voted to:

Void the BLM management plans that have helped keep sage grouse off of the endangered species list
Gut funding for National Parks
Allow for toxic waste in rivers close to parks
Transfer management to local elected officials (like your county commissioners) with the Labrador Transfer lite bill
There are a lot of other bad votes he's made, even votes that helped move the transfer movement along procedurally, as I understand it.

He's also inserting himself in a local range decision related to changing the use of an allotment from cattle to domestic bison, even going so far as to try and intimidate the director of the BLM during a committee hearing by seeming incredulous that the director of a large agency had no idea about a small grazing issue in NE MT.

I used to have a lot of respect for Congressman Zinke when he was in the state legislature. He was easy to work with and seemed to understand our issues fairly well. He wasn't always on the side of conservation, but he was generally viewed as someone you could talk with and get along with. Not sure what D.C. has done to him, but it's not good.

 

[RobG]

I used to have a lot of respect for Congressman Zinke when he was in the state legislature. He was easy to work with and seemed to understand our issues fairly well. He wasn't always on the side of conservation, but he was generally viewed as someone you could talk with and get along with. Not sure what D.C. has done to him, but it's not good.

He'll kiss the behind of whoever it takes for him to advance beyond where he is now.

 

[hnt4life]

Is the public lands topic the number one thing that willare up your mind on a candidate? It seems so far fetched to me, that one would choose a Democrat over a Republican based solely on that issue, which to me seems like it would be easily defeated if a real attempt was made. Contrast that to much larger and real issues that the Democrat party has actually advanced that are directly hurting sportsman and their families. Maybe I'm a bigger picture kind of person when it comes to politics?

 

[Straight Arrow]

Contrast that to much larger and real issues that the Democrat party has actually advanced that are directly hurting sportsman and their families ...

Such as what issues specifically???

Do you realize that transfer of federal public lands to the states (and then the inevitable result of sale to parties such as the Wilks bros.) is a national Republican platform plank?

What stated platform proposals / planks (issues) are proclaimed by the Democratic national platform that will potentially end up "hurting sportsman and their families?

 

[airlocksniffer]

What stated platform proposals / planks (issues) are proclaimed by the Democratic national platform that will potentially end up "hurting sportsman and their families?

Going out on a limb here and will surmise the poster is referring to the 2A and the Dems taking all our of guns away.

 

[Sytes]

I'm in the same boat as MTGomer. Zinke(R)... Same reasons. Bullock(D) and Zinke(R). I am not a party line voter as a registered Independent.

I'm going to vote for Bullock but also will be voting for Zinke.
He has never given any indication that he supports transfer and speaks out against it, against his own party and even against his own self interest.

He has worldly experience commanding SEAL team 6, is very personable and approachable to his constituents.

Fortunately for Montana I don't think either of them are bad candidates. Very rarely these days do we get to vote for someone instead of against someone. It doesn't seem like this is a choice between the lesser of two evils for once.

 

[mtmiller]

He's also inserting himself in a local range decision related to changing the use of an allotment from cattle to domestic bison, even going so far as to try and intimidate the director of the BLM during a committee hearing by seeming incredulous that the director of a large agency had no idea about a small grazing issue in NE MT.

As well as rile up the locals with Monument banter. Interesting he believes a Monument designation would be more stringent than current management on CMR.

Zinke said that he believes that President Barack Obama will soon declare the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge to be a monument. Zinke said he is all for monuments in Montana, within reason.

http://www.glasgowcourier.com/story/2016/01/27/news/zinke-visits-malta-talks-bison/3404.html

Change in class of livestock = EIS.....interesting.

Still not sure what box I am checking, but Zinke certainly doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

 

[Ben Lamb]

And he's working with Bishop on sage-grouse to transfer management of public lands from the BLM to the states.

He's made some great votes on LWCF & Transfer, but he's still towing leadership's line on public land management, and getting his input from Chuck Denowh & the UPOM crowd.

 

[hnt4life]

The second amendment is one of them, but I don't claim they will take all of our guns away. I believe that will push to severely limit our firearms and make it extremely expensive to purchase firearms and ammunition. We are only one supreme Court Judge away from that. Our country is over 19 trillion dollars in debt. Is that helping us? I am bringing home less money per paycheck than a year and a half ago despite several pay increases. Thank you "affordable" care act. I have stopped my donations to RMEF, because I can't afford it anymore.

 

[hnt4life]

I could type all evening, but...big picture! If it affects you as an individual, and you are a sportsman, than you better pay attention.

 

[BuzzH]

Thanks for the link to the article Miller...some interesting "facts" presented by Zinke.

No junipers past Butte????

WTF?

 

[Backstrap]

Zinke says he opposes the selling of public lands, but he wants them to be transferred to the state. This has been explained time and time again as a round about way of selling public lands because the states cannot keep them.

 

[Straight Arrow]

It boils down to deciding if you are more concerned about the support for gun ownership background checks or for support of the national party plank for transferring federal public lands.

For many it's not an easy decision, primarily due to the inflamed rhetoric about "losing" 2nd Amendment rights. Personally, having undergone background checks for security clearances in the military, then for a school mentor clearance card as a volunteer in my granddaughter's school, I am proud to have anyone review my background and the related references to my character. I would be similarly proud to undergo a background check that would substantiate my good citizenship and potential for being a responsible gun owner.

The ambiguous proposal for increased background checks is not even really on the table presently. However, the "transfer" proposal / plank is clearly worded. Consider which "big picture" proposal would really adversely effect "sportsman and their families", especially with respect to using firearms to hunt and for families to otherwise recreate on federal public lands.

Whichever is your worse fear, please weigh the consequences and do vote.