Democrats are fighting with independents, and Republicans are fighting with Republicans. A debate between two Republican House candidates is more lovefest than fireworks. A House candidate's son tangles with a Bozeman rabbi. And a new campaign ad hopes an anti-war message will resonate with voters.
Campaign Beat is MTPR's weekly political analysis program. MTPR's Sally Mauk is joined by Rob Saldin of the University of Montana’s Mansfield Center and Political Science Department, and Seaborn Larson, Senior Reporter at Lee Newspapers’ Montana State News Bureau.
Sally Mauk Rob, both the Atlantic and the New York Times had articles this week about the festering split among Montana Democrats over independent Seth Bodnar's run for the Senate and what that might mean for Bodnar's chance of winning the Senate seat.
Rob Saldin Right, Sally. I mean, just step back for a moment. So much has gone right for Bodnar, from the national environment to Daines dropping out the way he dropped out, you just couldn't draw it up any better. And yet the obvious problem from the start is that there's very little margin for error for Bodnar and if there's a Democrat on the ballot, even if it's just a zombie Democrat, that Democrat will draw a sizable number of votes. That certainly has significant implications for November. So that's a reasonable thing for these national outlets to focus on, as we've focused on from the beginning.
And clearly there is resistance in the Montana Democratic Party to the idea of just falling in line behind Bodnar. One reason for that is that even though recent years haven't been kind to Montana Dems, the state party is still institutionally pretty strong, far stronger than the state Democratic party in say, Idaho or the Dakotas. And a related reason, Sally, for the pushback is that if you're a leader in the Montana Democratic Party, or just very committed to the party, yes, you'd love to see Republicans lose this Senate seat, but that's not your only concern. You also want to build the party back so it's competitive moving forward. If you just take a pass on the highest profile race, well, that arguably hurts that effort and has implications for down-ballot races, for the legislature, for future cycles, and so forth. So, from that perspective, it's at least a bit more complicated than just a kind of cold calculation about who has the best chance to beat Kurt Alme this fall.
Sally Mauk I'll keep my eye out for a 'zombie Democrat'. Rob, if he does win the Senate seat, Bodnar says he won't caucus with either Democrats or Republicans, which seems politically naive.
Rob Saldin On the upside for Bodnar, it does go some distance toward reinforcing his credibility as a true independent and pushes back on these charges from Republicans that he's basically just a Democrat pretending to be an independent for political expediency. And he released a whole set of policy positions this week, which I think quite nicely reinforced that image in a way that doesn't map on quite right to either political party. But you point to a real practical issue there with not wanting to caucus with either party. If he does manage to win and doesn't caucus with either the Democrats or the Republicans, he potentially limits his ability to have an impact and influence the issues he cares about, right? There's a reason why the two independents currently in the Senate do caucus with the party. And that's because, whether we like it or not, Congress is organized around the parties. That's how, for instance, you get your committee assignments. So just making impassioned speeches on the Senate floor, a la 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington', that's not going to cut it. You have to be able to work with others. And the mechanism for doing that is the party structure and the committee structure. So, if that's a position Bodnar finds himself in, he'd have to figure out some way to navigate that for sure.
Sally Mauk Meanwhile, Seaborn, Montana Republicans are having their own ongoing spat. State party leaders this week issued a press release saying the party no longer considers members of the so-called Solutions Caucus to be Republicans.
Seaborn Larson Yeah, Sally. The Montana Republican Party this week put that press release out against 19 GOP candidates, most of them incumbents. And as Republicans, they're doing business this cycle with Fireweed, a campaign consulting firm we've talked about here on this show. It is run by some former staffers of Democratic campaigns, as well as different organizations and some past Republican politics work as well. And it's working with some longstanding, well-established GOP lawmakers. We're talking about Llew Jones of Conrad, David Bedey in Hamilton, Ed Buttrey in Great Falls. However, the Montana Republican Party has declared Fireweed as evidence, they say, of a Democratic conspiracy to undermine Republican elections.
So, the background here is that these GOP candidates are essentially moderates or center-right types who don't always vote with the Republican hardliners at the Legislature. This week's resolution by the state Republican Party mirrored several resolutions since that 2023 Legislature that have lashed at those legislators and their allies, which at times have included Democrats and left-leaning organizations. Like those past announcements by the party, the direct effect of rescinding their recognition of these candidates as Republicans is almost nothing. Most of them were already barred last year from voting on party officers, and these candidates are still free to campaign as Republicans. What this resolution does do, theoretically, is signal to the most engaged voters during this primary season that they should be suspicious of these Republican candidates. And some, like those I mentioned, are incumbents in their districts who have been elected again and again, so it'll be curious to see whether the party can trump those community connections.
Sally Mauk Two Republicans hoping to win Ryan Zinke's House seat, Al Olszewski and Aaron Flint, had their first and only debate this week and I thought there would be fireworks Seaborn, but it was more like a love fest, and I think any neutral observer would say Flint way outperformed Dr. Al.
Seaborn Larson Right. Aaron Flint really led the evening, which remained friendly throughout the debate. He's a Conservative radio host whose campaign has been blessed by Congressman Ryan Zinke and President Donald Trump. Exchanging with people on the fly has been his whole job for a long time now. He really drove home that Trump endorsement for the crowd again and again, and he would really escalate his language and his tone, volume even, when he'd rail against Democrats in Montana and in D.C.
Dr. Al Olszewski is a more seasoned candidate for sure. He's a former legislator who also ran for governor and for the U.S. Senate and the House before. Tuesday night he demonstrated a good handle on the issues in western Montana, but he struggled with the format of the debate, for sure. There was this crossfire component where candidates could ask each other follow-up questions. Olszewski sometimes left those moments open with some awkward pauses, and Flint would jump in and take advantage of that empty space. But still, they were very friendly on stage. When Flint went on the attack, it was usually against Democrats, Olszewski, meanwhile, went after the federal government. He's more of an old school Republican, but these two have known each other a long time. At one point, Aaron Flint even said, 'I love you, brother.' Montana Secretary of State Christi Jacobsen did not attend the event. She told debate organizers that she had a scheduling conflict.
Sally Mauk One area where they did disagree, Rob, was over whether Congress should have more of a say about the war with Iran. Here's that exchange.
Al Olszewski "So, Aaron, we come into May 1st. Where would you vote on the 1973 War Powers Resolution moving forward? Just give them blanket approval, or do you have certain limitations that you think that should be placed on the executive branch as we move forward with our military conflict with Iran? "
Aaron Flint "The War Powers Act – there are a couple of folks who are proposing a reform to the War Powers act right now. You might know their names; Bernie Sanders does that name ring a bell or are you getting your mittens on right now? And then was it was, it's Ilhan Omar. Do you guys know who Ilhan Omar is? Do you want Ilhan Omar having veto authority over the commander-in-chief while your sons and daughters are in harm's way? "
Sally Mauk First of all, Rob, Republicans, not Democrats, control Congress, so it would be Republicans deciding if Congress were to act on the War Powers Resolution. Secondly, Flint's exaggerated reference to Congresswoman Omar is insulting at best.
Rob Saldin He mentions Bernie Sanders too, although he doesn't seem to have any issues pronouncing his name. What stood out to me, Sally, was just the way in which Flint dodged the question here, right? Instead of saying what he actually thinks about the War Powers Act, he manages to twist it into a question somehow of whether Sanders and Omar should have veto power over the presidency on national security matters, which, for the reasons you suggest, doesn't make much sense. But it is, in a way, a clever response, I suppose, in so far as it allows him to avoid associating himself too much with an unpopular war and also avoid criticizing Donald Trump, which if he came out in favor of congressional oversight, that would be an implicit criticism of Trump. So, it certainly wasn't a substantive answer. But this is also an uncomfortable topic for someone who has so firmly tied himself to the president.
Sally Mauk And it was a clever deflection, actually.
Rob Saldin Absolutely.
Sally Mauk One of the stranger spats, Seaborn, is between Democratic House candidate Ryan Busse's son, Lander, and a Bozeman rabbi.
Seaborn Larson Right. The New York Post last week published a story to highlight some of the social media posts from Lander Busse. The article focused on the younger Busse's past posts on social media regarding different conflicts between Israel and Muslim countries in the Middle East, especially following the war in Iran. Lander Busse has used some pretty coarse language online. He's 20 or 21 and he said, essentially, 'F you' to a rabbi in Montana who was trying to engage him online. I think one of the posts that drew some of the bigger reactions last week was a post in response to Benjamin Netanyahu, in which Netanyahu said that 'Free Palestine' is the new 'Heil Hitler'. In response, Lander Busse posted a video of a TV character saying those words.
So, this rabbi, Chaim Bruk, has grown into sort of a Conservative figure in Montana politics in recent years. He does events with elected officials, but he also engages with high-profile Republicans on social media, as well as some Republican operative types. Bruk, back in March when he was having this exchange with Lander Busse, flagged Ryan Busse. The Flint campaign appears to have spun this up to the New York Post, and Ryan Busse told the publication his son is not anti-Semitic and that he still didn't condone that language either. Lander ultimately deleted some of those social media posts and issued an apology.
Sally Mauk Here's an excerpt from Lander Busse's apology.
Lander Busse "I think it's morally wrong to be hemorrhaging political attacks at the children of candidates. I'm not the one on the ballot here, my dad is, and the fact that people are coming after me says a lot about the state of politics right now."
Sally Mauk I don't know, Rob, I think if you're a 20-something young man posting political stuff online, you're maybe fair game.
Rob Saldin Well, Sally, handling family members of political figures is often a bit tricky. But I agree with you. I actually don't find this particular case to be a close call. I think, Sally, we've got a couple north stars in these situations. First, children are afforded a much higher degree of protection than adults. And second, family members who choose to stay out of the spotlight, who choose to avoid engaging in politics are afforded more protection than those who choose to enter the public arena. In this case, Lander Busse is an adult, not a child. And there is also no doubt that he chose to engage politically. He chose to mix it up rather aggressively with the rabbi on social media. He chose to make various other public statements, a number of which were controversial. And that's of course, all totally fine, absolutely his right. When you exercise that right, it's also part of the deal that others are allowed to take note and to respond. So, you don't get to have it both ways. If you're an adult and you eagerly jump into the fray, it is not reasonable to then suggest that you should be off limits to criticism.
Sally Mauk Lastly, several candidates, including long-shot Democratic House candidate Matt Rains, have TV ads on the air now, and here's an excerpt from his ad.
Matt Rains "I know the deadly cost of war. We could have stopped this, but every senator and congressman from Montana rolled over and voted to support Trump's war. I approve this message. We need to hold them all accountable."
Sally Mauk And if polls are accurate, Rob, the anti-war messaging may resonate with some voters.
Rob Saldin I think it could. In a Democratic primary, you're looking for ways to distinguish yourself from fellow partisans. And so drawing attention to what, for a lot of people, is the issue of the day is a good move for Rains in a Democratic primary. To the extent that Matt Rains is the candidate who we associate with an anti-war stance, that could very well work to his benefit.
Sally Mauk And he's speaking as a veteran.
Rob Saldin Yeah, and he has that credibility, which he doesn't mention explicitly, but he refers to it too.
Sally Mauk Well guys, the primary is just over a month away. We'll talk again next week.
Campaign Beat is MTPR's weekly political analysis program. MTPR's Sally Mauk is joined by Rob Saldin of the University of Montana’s Mansfield Center and Political Science Department, and Seaborn Larson, Senior Reporter at Lee Newspapers’ Montana State News Bureau. Tune in on-air Fridays at 5:45 p.m. during All Things Considered, or Saturdays at 9:45 a.m., before Weekend Edition. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.
