What the heck happened in Montana?
http://www.billingsgazette.net…
U.S. House, District 1 (At-Large)
Democratic Primary
Driscoll , John Dem 70,205 49%
Hunt , Jim Dem 59,425 42%
Candee , Robert Dem 12,476 9%
U.S. Senate
Republican Primary
Kelleher , Bob GOP 26,765 36%
Lange , Michael GOP 16,959 23%
Bushman , Kirk GOP 15,393 21%
Lovaas , Patty GOP 7,604 10%
Pearson , Anton GOP 4,215 6%
Garnett , Shay GOP 2,774 4%
We already know about Bob Kelleher, but isn’t John Driscoll also a perennial candidate?
John Driscoll AND Bob Kelleher? What’s going on here? Some sort of love affair with perennial candidates or something? Or did Montana voters just not really care?
With the Democratic Presidential campaign sucking up all the attention in the state, Hunt simply didn’t spend enough to raise his profile. He WAS on the air, but it seems like it just wasn’t enough with Barack and Hillary dominating the airwaves and news.
If there was no high profile presidential contest, I think Hunt would’ve been alright here.
I think what happened in Montana with Kelleher and Driscoll is this year’s message of Change, whether in the Democratic or Republican parties. Kelleher is certainly a very unique individual, and may even be worthy of being elected had he not run under so many parties in the past people may have a hard time of telling where he really comes from. And Driscoll, having spent almost nothing and won, has demonstrated that Americans are ready for a new type of politics where candidates just present themselves and not having to lavish thousands of dollars over a race.
It almost reminds me of the Maryland House primaries back in February when Donna Edwards defeated incumbent Al Wynn and how Steve Gilchrist lost to Andy Harris on the Republican side.