Obama Needs to Remind Montana Voters of McCain’s Venal Record on Protecting the Environment
George Bush beat John Kerry in the state of Montana by 21 percentage points in the 2004 presidential election. So one asks, why would Barack Obama think he stands any chance of winning that state? The explanation is that polls now show that Montana may be in play in 2008. Obama did well in Montana in the Democratic primary. Increasingly, Democrats have been winning statewide office in Montana. In Montana, both U.S. senators, the governor, and the attorney general are Democrats.
Obama’s optimistic view of Montana also has to do with changing demographics. The number of registered voters in the state has increased by only about 10 percent since 2004. But the population is shifting from the more conservative eastern plains to the more liberal western counties.
The western Montana cities of Butte, Bozeman, and the state capital of Helena are good areas for Obama to target. Bozeman is a growing high-tech center. It also attracts a large number of retirees. Also, the western areas of Montana are heavily populated with environmentally sensitive people who have moved from Oregon, Washington State, and northern California.
A main target for the Obama campaign must be vote-rich Missoula County in the far western part of the state. Missoula is home to the University of Montana. Other than Yellowstone County, which includes Billings, the state’s largest city, Missoula County has the largest population in the state. Kerry carried the county by 6 percentage points in 2004. Obama needs to boost his margin in Missoula County in order to carry the state. The 14,000 college students on the Missoula campus offer Obama a strong base of voters as well as a cadre of campaign volunteers.
Obama must appeal to environmentally conscious voters in these western counties. He must demonstrate how McCain has a record of securing favorable property deals on federal lands for campaign contributors. Some of these sweetheart deals included land in national forests and other open space areas that were important habitat for area wildlife.
Rob Smith, director of the Sierra Club in Arizona, told the Washington Post, “When the public trust intersects with private interests, he [McCain] has favored land development in every case.” (See earlier OEW post.)
In addition, here are some environmental issues where McCain’s VP choice Sarah Palin will be in sharp conflict with many voters in western Montana:
• Sarah Palin wants to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This preserve is home to large numbers of caribou and migratory birds. So far, even John McCain is opposed to drilling in this important wildlife habitat.
• Palin has gone on record as declaring that global warming is not caused by man. She appears to have no intention of doing anything about it.
• Almost without exception, residents of the North view protecting the polar bear as an important mission. Palin is opposed to placing polar bears on the endangered species list.
• Palin has sided with mining and drilling concerns on environmental issues permitting more pollutants to enter the Alaskan environment, which will be harmful to the millions of birds that spend at least part of the year in Alaska.
In addition to winning Montana voters who are concerned with environmental issues, Obama can also make good gains by appealing to the large bloc of senior citizens in Montana. The state currently ranks 14th in its percentage of senior citizens relative to its total population. Therefore, Obama can win votes by educating seniors on McCain’s destructive voting record on Medicare, prescription drugs, and social security. (See earlier OEW posts.)
Over his 22-year Senate career McCain has repeatedly voted against measures that would reduce the medical costs of senior citizens. And he is a proponent of social security reform that will create risk to the retirement fund on which so many of Montana’s senior citizens depend.
Do not forget the large Native American population in Montana. There are 46,000 eligible American Indian voters in Montana. They make up more than 6 percent of the total electorate. Voter turnout by American Indians in Montana has been very low and thousands of Native Americans remain unregistered. Clearly, there is an opportunity here for Obama to mine a group of voters who should be sympathetic to his policies and programs. Most Native Americans tend to vote the Democratic ticket.
Mc cain you must hit him hard go hare on him
McCain will start his highly offensive ad campaign in early October ( Rev.Wright, Barack “Hussan” Obama, etc.). a possible ad for western states to counter these type ads ( if you want to stoop down to their level ) would be to form the following ad: A ” maverick” is a Texas term for a “unbranded” motherless calf ( show video of calf) but a “Dogie” is a western term for a “branded” motherless calf ” show video of a calf with “GWB” branded on it’s rump. Run video of McCain supporting Bush over 90% of the time, Bush with hand over McCain’s shoulder, McCain and Bush hugging, Bush and McCain with birthday cake (McCain’s birthday) during Katrina Crisis. End with statement that McCain may have been a “Maverick” once but he isn’t one now and fade out with the view of a herd of cattle being driven with the song “get along little dogie” in the background. This might attract the western voter.
Obama has a good chance to win in Montana, as stated, because of the demographic changes in the state. That said, it is wishful thinking to believe that Sarah Palin is a net negative for McCain here. She has certainly reinvigorated the large fundamentalist Christian community in Montana, which otherwise may have sat on its hands at home on November 4. McCain seems to know that Palin offers his only hope here; he has not visited Montana once during the campaign, while Obama has been here five times (but has announced no further trips). Ultimately, this will turn out to be a get-out-the-vote contest, and given the disarray of the GOP, the nod goes to Obama in Big Sky Country.