MT: Gianforte vs Quist

Sytes

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
12,866
Location
Montana
These two are the R & D members running for Zinke's seat.

Gianforte has been running a radio ad where he tactically is using the terms, "Keep public lands in public's hands" and matching Pelosi to Quist as one and the same with respect to their very liberal ideology. Oh, not to forget Quist comment regarding the 2nd Amendment...

I plan to vote Quist as his stance is well understood over our public lands staying in public hands whereas Gianforte's use is a pretty deceptive way to attach himself to this line of thought. Gianforte's does not mention the intent to transfer to State and not discuss how much "public land stays in public's hands" as well as steam access, etc... Quist's 2nd Amendment position is crap. I would not vote for Quist based on this however, due to Gianforte's focused position on our lands and a House/Senate and Executive... along with a soon future Judicial R positions on the 2nd Amendment, Quist's position on 2nd amendment=Hunting thoughts will not go anywhere what so ever... Biggest thing for Gianforte, he will enhance the R (GOP's) platform on the public lands topic...

I am not a fan of Quist's use of his 2nd Amendment ramblings... Counting the 2nd Amendment for hunting purpose and the interest to create additional laws (may we say redundant?) over the use of guns meant to kill people. Huh? My Glock 27 gen 4 is not meant to hunt... It is meant to kill people. He treads a line that easily can be a captive statement(s) used against him by the hard nosed R's... Speaking specifically of 2nd Amendment interests. Why Quist even needed to open this can is beyond me. He had the D's support w/o this spout off.

Anyhow, I've not heard a Quist radio advertisement yet... Not much for radio now a days though it says something when I've heard Gianforte's position / advertisement multiple times yet Quist? Got a feeling Gianforte will be our next Rep in Congress... Sad.
 
Last edited:
Quist can win if he gets out the vote out. Make sure you and your friends are registered by April 14th - preferably by mail in vote. The ballots will arrive around April 28th. Election day is May 25th. The Quist campaign is still getting yard signs, etc together.

GG has the look and feel of a swamp creature. Nobody really likes or trusts him. He had to fund the majority ($5.8 million) of his governor campaign himself and his votes were mostly from the Hillary gag-reflex. If Trump continues to do the bang-up job he's doing the whole House might turn D.
 
Greg Gianforte during the nominating convention.

"I am running for congress so that your voice is heard in DC and my resolve to make a difference for MT has only been strengthened in the last year."

"We need to fight for our country, protect our borders, not allow MT cities to be sanctuary cities, strengthen our military and destroy ISIS, reign in out of control regulations, demand better management - and more state and local control of our public lands."


"I will protect and defend the constitution and will use it as my guiding light!"

"The other candidates here tonight are honorable men, but we must put forth the best candidate who can win. We are already in the final lap of this race - ballots will be mailed next month. I have 84% name ID across the state while the other candidates each have less than 10%."

"I'll drain the swamp because I can't be bought. You deserve a champion who will always be on Montana's side."
 
Last edited:
Re: Sanctuary Cities...

On Feb. 23, Quist appeared on Voices on Montana radio show. During a call in portion of the show, Quist was asked his stance on sanctuary cities.

"We have to realize you can't demonize an entire ethnic group, just because the extreme actions of another ... We learned we have a strength in our diversity (in Montana)," Quist responded. "I feel like it's got to work for everybody or it doesn't work for anybody. We can never be free until we lift all of humanity."

What the hell? Does Quist understand what a "Sanctuary City" represents??? Has nothing to do with the Syrian refugee issue. This deals with cities that oppose our laws for immigrating into our country. Oppose our enforcement of our Immigration laws. Protects illegals over that of American citizens...

I've quoted this on FB and really find value with Theodore Roosevelt or as Ben efers to him as, Teddy... :D Not only is he one of the most influential past leaders in support of our lands, he was also one of the most powerful proponents of American pride!

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” - Theodore Roosevelt
 
Last edited:
He had to fund the majority ($5.8 million) of his governor campaign himself and his votes were mostly from the Hillary gag-reflex. If Trump continues to do the bang-up job he's doing the whole House might turn D.

I guess damned if you do, damned if you don't. Had someone else given him the $5.8 million for his campaign, then people would've complained that he was getting outside / special interest money.

Thought this was an interesting read buried in the Gazette:
http://billingsgazette.com/news/gov...cle_a660f016-9229-5e3c-9114-f831a0ba012f.html
 
The article in the Gazette leaves more questions regarding his credibility than it answers.

Someday I hope to be able to vote for someone based on their ability, integrity and intentions rather than the lesser of two evils.
 
I guess damned if you do, damned if you don't. Had someone else given him the $5.8 million for his campaign, then people would've complained that he was getting outside / special interest money.
Not really - he has mountains of dark money working on his behalf too (a $700,000 ad campaign was announced the first day Quist was announced). The point is that GG didn't have grass roots support so he had to bring his personal money to fund his own campaign. Bigly. Truth is, nobody likes GG. The Chronicle had a poll a few days ago and GG only got 25% of the vote! Yes, that's not a scientific poll, but only 25% of the vote in his own hometown is pretty embarrassing.

None of this counts the $8 million "donation" GG to MSU to have a building named after him after he made the announcement to run for Governor.
 
These two are the R & D members running for Zinke's seat.

Gianforte has been running a radio ad where he tactically is using the terms, "Keep public lands in public's hands" and matching Pelosi to Quist as one and the same with respect to their very liberal ideology. Oh, not to forget Quist comment regarding the 2nd Amendment...

I plan to vote Quist as his stance is well understood over our public lands staying in public hands whereas Gianforte's use is a pretty deceptive way to attach himself to this line of thought. Gianforte's does not mention the intent to transfer to State and not discuss how much "public land stays in public's hands" as well as steam access, etc... Quist's 2nd Amendment position is crap. I would not vote for Quist based on this however, due to Gianforte's focused position on our lands and a House/Senate and Executive... along with a soon future Judicial R positions on the 2nd Amendment, Quist's position on 2nd amendment=Hunting thoughts will not go anywhere what so ever... Biggest thing for Gianforte, he will enhance the R (GOP's) platform on the public lands topic...

I am not a fan of Quist's use of his 2nd Amendment ramblings... Counting the 2nd Amendment for hunting purpose and the interest to create additional laws (may we say redundant?) over the use of guns meant to kill people. Huh? My Glock 27 gen 4 is not meant to hunt... It is meant to kill people. He treads a line that easily can be a captive statement(s) used against him by the hard nosed R's... Speaking specifically of 2nd Amendment interests. Why Quist even needed to open this can is beyond me. He had the D's support w/o this spout off.

Anyhow, I've not heard a Quist radio advertisement yet... Not much for radio now a days though it says something when I've heard Gianforte's position / advertisement multiple times yet Quist? Got a feeling Gianforte will be our next Rep in Congress... Sad.

"2nd amendment ramblings"

The Republi-tards play on 2nd amendment emotions. Ask your self this...what is more secure...the CONSTITUTIONAL 2nd amendment or your public lands.....realistically they are not coming for your guns no more than your freedom of speech but they are coming for your public lands....GG is a fake and phony douche bag....
 
"our public lands" are in about as much danger of transfer as I am of being transferred into NASA's Space Program.

Great article "bugle 'em", how any reasonable or thinking person could vote for quist after reading that, well, I just have to say WTF? Quist sounds like a typical liberal....it's always the fault of someone or something else. Fraud, deceit, not paying property taxes, not paying contractors. Some of you are going to vote for him? Nice.
 
Largely agree with Sytes.

I'd like Quist to win, but I have a feeling it is all but over in Gianforte's favor. Nothing seems to be rolling for Quist. If a D is going to win a statewide race in Montana, that candidate needs to be able to be able to identify with conservative leaning moderates. Bullock barely pulled it off, winning the governor's race in a state that went heavily for Trump. Schweitzer could do it and Tester has done it. Those are the examples recent memory provides.

The top two choices the D's had - Quist or Curtis - are great candidates to Democrats, but that is about it. Gianforte is an anti-public lands rich guy who probably doesn't understand the average Montanan at all. But make no mistake - if he had defaulted on loans and not paid contractors for work they'd done, the Democratic party would be beating him over the head with those facts.

Neil Degrasse Tyson had a tweet a while back that there should be a "none of the above" choice on all ballots, and if "none of the above" were to get more votes than any other option we should start over with new options. He tweeted that half in jest, but the more I think about it the more I think that it could fix a lot of our country's problems.
 
Neil Degrasse Tyson had a tweet a while back that there should be a "none of the above" choice on all ballots, and if "none of the above" were to get more votes than any other option we should start over with new options. He tweeted that half in jest, but the more I think about it the more I think that it could fix a lot of our country's problems.

+1 with "none of the above" options. Make each party...D's & R's responsible to foot the bill should additional voting take place after both parties throw up terrible candidates :) One could always wish.
 
"our public lands" are in about as much danger of transfer as I am of being transferred into NASA's Space Program.

Great article "bugle 'em", how any reasonable or thinking person could vote for quist after reading that, well, I just have to say WTF? Quist sounds like a typical liberal....it's always the fault of someone or something else. Fraud, deceit, not paying property taxes, not paying contractors. Some of you are going to vote for him? Nice.

Looks to me like neither candidate is that great, but with the onslaught of trash public land bills in congress the last couple months and the emboldening of the transfer scheme, I'd say douse the flames rather than throw gasoline on it. Gianforte is anti-public lands, and you have to pick your poisons here. Quist isn't a perfect candidate, but that seems to be the new norm. On this one, as someone from the anti-public land state of Utah I would ask you to vote against someone like Gianforte and FOR public lands. The last thing we need is to replace Zinke with another anti-public land guy in the house, there's enough of them. This is a chance to send a message on public lands, and if you value them, send it loud and clear. If you can't vote for Quist fine, but don't vote for some anti-public land guy who is out of touch with what you enjoy and would sale it off the first chance he got.
 
I'll make you a deal. I will agree to support, campaign and vote exclusively for anti-PLT candidates here in CO if you will do likewise in (any state). I'm already doing that anyway. Understand this: when you support PLT in your state you are supporting it in my state. Not okay, not cool, keep public lands in public hands.
 
"our public lands" are in about as much danger of transfer as I am of being transferred into NASA's Space Program.
Eric, what date is lift-off and will it be televised? 'Didn't even realize you were on the space travel list.

With respect to public land transfer, as my grandpa used to say,"If you bury your head in the sand ... your butt is exposed."
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
110,807
Messages
1,935,176
Members
34,887
Latest member
Uncle_Danno
Back
Top