| Don't panic. There is no intention of making this a weekly feature. ;-) It would appear that our junior Senator has been on mind of the Montana online a whole lot here of late. For myself, it began with Pogie's post showing Jon favorably positioned heading into the 2012 election cycle. It seems the man is somewhat popular. Tester posts a 50-40 job performance mark, putting him in the top ten among the senators PPP has measured this year. That is particularly impressive, considering that Republicans outnumber Democrats by nine points in this sample, and even independents are more prevalent. Pogie kicks this game off with a very simple and pointed observation: Senator Tester’s going to face a tough challenge in 2012 and he’s occasionally disappointed some of us on the left, but it’s encouraging that he seems largely to have escaped the displeasure directed at Senator Baucus by maintaining pretty close adherence to the values that got him elected in the first place. That certainly sets our themes. Tough challenge, dissapointing to the left, and distance from Baucus. So let's see what others have to say. Follow me down below. |
The tough challenge relates to the early (some argue too early, and I agree) entry of Steve Daines into the election cycle on the Republican side. This has some of our dextra brethren salivating. Notice, please, that this your PSC representative-elect already campaigning on Daines' behalf. Jack the Blogger, highlights the early tactic that will be used consistently in this race. Tester said 'no earmarks' and has now backed off. This carries the theme we saw sweep Republicans to victory in 2010. Supposedly it's all about spending, or at least spending when Democrats do it. "He lied", they will wail, and completely ignore Denny's lies of kind. IOKIYAAR. Still, as we witnessed just a short month ago, these lies about lies work. I think Jack's analysis has merit, and should probably be read. In truth, the Republican attacks might actually work, because they will be supported by those on the left. I'm not judging, just saying. There are complaints to be leveled against Tester's honesty when comparing his actions with his campaign rhetoric. Tester is seen as campaigning being anti-wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not convinced that actually what he did, but leftward disatisfaction is running very high. Duganz doesn't seem to believe he cares about these concerns, and that Tester certainly won't respond to them. Which brings up Tester's promise of transperancy, which others, including our own Matthew Koehler questions highly. Matthew's primary (and I use that word pointedly) issue is the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act. That's fine, and I understand and accept Matthew's positions on the matter. It certainly is not within the venue of this post to argue that particular piece of legislation. What I am attempting to point out is that the right will use the rather intense dissatisfaction of the left, against the left. They might likely succeed. Two points that occur to me, though. One, when Jon ran against Conrad Burns, he was really and truly kind of a nobody. Both the right and left are pointing out that Tester only won by a mere 2900+ votes. It seems a popular passtime for those of us squating at the opening of the second decade of the 21st century to forget what happened a mere 4 years ago, and how it was achieved. Jon Tester will not go into 2012 a 30 point underdog with no money. He doesn't need one of the GREATEST BANDS OF ALL TIME! to hold him a benefit concert. Jon Tester will go into this cycle well funded. One's opinion may be that is good or bad, distateful or not. But keep in mind, this is the age of Citizens United. It won't surprise me a bit if Daines, as the n00b, is better funded than Tester. This is my personal view, but I will find it silly when the left kevetches about Tester being bought and payed for, while Daines is so obviously that very thing. Two, Tester is a centrist, a real one and not a phony. As the poll presented above shows quite clearly, he does represent Montana very well. He is lauded almost apolitically for his hard work for veterans, his support for the mission of the MANG, his efforts to create jobs in Montana and his stances relating to firearms control. That contributes to his popularity in a state that is really very centrist. Now, Jon isn't supportive enough of progressive issues. I get that, and have no desire to argue about it. The right, driven almost to madness by the Tea Party, is all about the primary. Many mentions have been made of primary challenge to Tester from the left. So, what I would like to know from the readers here is this: Who have we got? Who is going to primary Tester? Who could primary Tester who would be more favorable to progressive values? In my view, and it is strictly mine, any failure in response and lack of support for Tester is ceding the race to Daines. That's simply an observation. Make of it what you will. Montana Cowgirl posted up a choice bit of advice to Jon Tester going into the 2012 season. He should distance himself from toxic Baucus. I for one am still ruminating on this one. I bring it up here because the comments to that post of the Cowgirl are thought provoking and somewhat troll free. I hope that inspires thoughts regarding the topic presented here today. So what say you? Primary Tester? With who? Let Daines win? Why? Bob Kelleher for the win? |
