HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Meet the Gun-Loving, Stra...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:56 AM

Meet the Gun-Loving, Straight-Talking, 2016 Democratic Presidential Dark Horse

To catch former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, look in Georgetown. Georgetown Lake in Montana, that is, a place nowhere close to resembling the nation’s capital or anything in it. The colorful Democrat, who has been receiving plenty of presidential and Senate speculation since leaving the governorship, passes his days running his natural-resource businesses, snowmobiling, and ice fishing.
But while Schweitzer sounds uninterested in a Senate campaign against Democrat Max Baucus -- he declined to answer questions about the six-term senator in an interview -- he’s not closing the door on a future presidential run.

Schweitzer could be a 2016 dark horse; he was a popular Democratic governor in a red state and is no stranger to working the media and the national stage with his larger-than-life personality.. A governor who vetoed Republican bills by burning the word “VETO” onto them using a branding iron. A governor who can handle Letterman.
Montana Democrats warn not to rule out him out as a viable presidential candidate, citing his mastery of the working-the-room, grabbing-shoulders, stump-speech-giving brand of politics.
Schweitzer said he’s “been a person that believes government has no place standing between you and your physician and government has no place in your bedroom.”
As a Democrat from a gun-owning state, he’s in favor of background checks while also saying he has “more than I need and less than I want.” When asked how many and what kinds of guns he owns, he responded, “None of your damn business.”

Recent buzz has centered over whether Schweitzer will indeed challenge Baucus in a 2014 -- which some Montana Democrats privately say is more rumor than reality and is intended to keep Schweitzer in the limelight. A Public Policy Polling survey showing him leading Baucus by 18 points was posted on his Facebook page (he has said he didn’t post it himself). “The rumored primary battle is more fodder for news columns than it is real,” one senior Montana Democrat says.
There is no love lost between the two Democrats -- they’ve long had a cold relationship, particularly since Baucus’s role in shepherding Obama's health care law through Congress. (Schweitzer is a vocal advocate of a single-payer health care system.)

. And Schweitzer doesn’t hide his disdain for Washington, calling it a “corrupt” place that he’s uninterested in becoming a part of. ("I am not goofy enough to be in the House, and I'm not senile enough to be in the Senate”, is a line he’s been using for some time.)
“Congress is motion masquerading as action. I haven’t figured out how these members of Congress--if you’re in the House, you probably have a dozen or two employees, in the Senate, you have 50 or 60, and you don’t even run anything,” says Schweitzer.
He still subscribes to his “not goofy enough” and “too senile” remark as describing his feelings on working in the halls of the Capitol. “That’s the way I stand today,” Schweitzer said from his Georgetown Lake home. “I’m looking over the lake. A snowmobile just went by. You can’t beat that.”


http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/meet-the-gun-loving-straight-talking-2016-democratic-presidential-dark-horse-20130222

43 replies, 4754 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply Meet the Gun-Loving, Straight-Talking, 2016 Democratic Presidential Dark Horse (Original post)
octoberlib Feb 2013 OP
graham4anything Feb 2013 #1
octoberlib Feb 2013 #2
graham4anything Feb 2013 #4
Hard Assets Feb 2013 #23
Whisp Feb 2013 #31
pasto76 Feb 2013 #9
graham4anything Feb 2013 #14
KansDem Feb 2013 #3
octoberlib Feb 2013 #5
KansDem Feb 2013 #6
jmowreader Feb 2013 #7
graham4anything Feb 2013 #15
AverageMe Feb 2013 #21
jmowreader Feb 2013 #22
TexasTowelie Feb 2013 #27
jmowreader Feb 2013 #38
vt_native Feb 2013 #8
mwb970 Feb 2013 #10
mikekohr Feb 2013 #11
graham4anything Feb 2013 #17
mikekohr Feb 2013 #32
graham4anything Feb 2013 #37
mikekohr Feb 2013 #39
intheflow Feb 2013 #12
Mojorabbit Feb 2013 #24
intheflow Feb 2013 #35
Mojorabbit Feb 2013 #36
dlwickham Feb 2013 #26
dsc Feb 2013 #13
Liberal_Stalwart71 Feb 2013 #16
progressoid Feb 2013 #18
cilla4progress Feb 2013 #19
geek tragedy Feb 2013 #20
BlueStater Feb 2013 #25
Hell Hath No Fury Feb 2013 #28
BWCC Feb 2013 #29
MFM008 Feb 2013 #30
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #33
southernyankeebelle Feb 2013 #34
Hippo_Tron Feb 2013 #40
southernyankeebelle Feb 2013 #42
Hippo_Tron Feb 2013 #41
brooklynite Feb 2013 #43

Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:09 AM

1. He would not have my vote in any primary. Pro-stockpiling of guns is not a liberal to me.

 

And his saying he has not nearly enough guns makes him a stockpiler of guns.

Another wild west fancier, reminds me of another candidate from day one I never liked
and was very happy he did not get far, that being Gary Hart.

No to cowboys in any party.
They give strength to private citizens owning guns.

(and private citizens with guns is more important to me as an issue than foreign stuff any day of the week).

BTW, I don't like shoulder grabbers. They grab too hard, and it hurts the shoulders.
Besides, it connotates someone sneaking up from behind and ambushing one, instead of looking someone straight in the eye, shaking hands and conversing.
Takes looking into someones eyes to see if they are sincere or not when meeting in person.

(A good example of someone always sincere is Joe Biden, firmly shaking ones hand and looking straight into your eye.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:41 AM

2. I've never owned a gun in my life and tend to agree with

Last edited Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:13 AM - Edit history (1)

you on that. I do like his stance on single payer healthcare, the fact that he doesn't get along with Baucus and thinks Washington is corrupt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:53 AM

4. He would be ok in the senate, but not on the national ticket

 

Senators have the freedom to be regional candidates on some issues, national on others,
and he would maybe be more liberal than Max although that would remain to be seen.(assuming he accomplished the things he wants).

IMHO the healthcare issue will resolve itself naturally in the on coming years just may take a few longer than wanted. I would rather have the system France has over the one the UK has.
(though either would be great over what it is before Obama.)

I don't see Brian hurting as a Senator, but as a President I could see some negatives.

So yes for senate, no for higher office.

(and I don't know his views on social issues, so am saying this while reserving judgement to a later time on social issues.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:15 PM

23. Scheweitzer should reconsider his decision not to primary Baucus.

 

He's one asshole that needed to be primaried YEARS ago.

I don't care how powerful this moron is. We hold the seats and the Senate, and we can begin removing Blue Dogs with progressives.

I can understand why Schewitzer would be pro-gun, and I don't give a shit.

He's still a progressive, and he needs to get in and kick Baucus out. The pro-gun ideals will be shoved aside in favor of the Democratic platform.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:18 PM

31. better that than stock piling dead people in the mid east.

 

I'm not too fond of his gun fetish either, but not everyone with guns are nuts. And I would trust him with matters of war - he wouldn't be frivolous and stupid about war I don't think. so yah, I'd support him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:55 AM

9. good thing he would be running as a liberal

rather as a democrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #9)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:32 AM

14. Liberals are democratics

 

Progressives can be right or left and radical.

Liberals are always democratic
Every single protester superstar in the 1960s 1070s that is still alive today would back President Obama.

And the worst Democratic candidate is 10000 times better than any republican or extremist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:51 AM

3. Brian Schweitzer, "On the Issues"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:55 AM

5. Thanks for the info, KansDem! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:02 AM

6. You're welcome!

Some of his stances, like on abortion, civil rights, the Iraq War and Social Security, look promising.

Some others he hasn't a public record, yet.

Definitely someone to pay attention to!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:51 AM

7. Schweitzer is the GOP's worst nightmare

They win races by selling the notion that Democrats are going to take your guns away...Schweitzer is the kind of guy who'd put a gun rack on Air Force One.

He's also the kind of guy who could convince Republicans to embrace progressive ideals.

The important thing about Schweitzer is if placed on the general ballot, he will take Texas. I think the deciding issue if we don't run Schweitzer will be RKBA. If we do run him, it becomes do we accept 30,000 gun deaths a year as the price of unfettered access to guns, or do we create a policy that lets you the law abiding citizen keep your guns while keeping them away from criminals?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #7)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:35 AM

15. The Great Equalizer won't let the NRA win any race in 2014 and 2016

 

a staunchly pro-gun candidate would ruin that.

The days of the NRA blackmail are over.
The NRA is dead. They just don't know it yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #15)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:37 PM

21. The Great Equalizer for Republicans

 

For most people who support restricted Gun ownership it is not a voting issue. For those who are for unrestricted Gun ownership, it is a single issue they vote on. That is why these restrictions are so difficult to get through congress. I do not like unrestricted Guns, but it will never determine my vote one way or the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #15)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:41 PM

22. Here is the view from Red State Hell

I work as a prepress technician at a company that prints many newspaper titles. All of them serve very red areas.

Since Sandy Hook there have been exactly three subjects for letters to the editor: guns, taxes and the sequester, and how evil Obama is. People out here are absolutely certain the Democratic Party is going to grab their guns...and that is a sentiment shared across the three-EV to six-EV states. Guns, fellow DUer, are a very real concern to a lot of people...and those people vote.

The Democratic Party's most significant problem is it's written off all the small states. Because the six-and-under states are so heavily tilted to the GOP, largely because of guns, we HAVE to win Ohio, and Michigan and a couple other big states that are full of Republicans. As 1984 proved, there is not one state in the Union that won't go Republican under the right conditions.

Schweitzer gives us breathing room. If Hillary is our candidate the GOP can just campaign on her planned gun grab. Schweitzer loves guns. He won't let Congress ban them. And he has signed tax cuts and run balanced budgets so he takes away the second leg of the three-legged elephant. You can't do a successful negative campaign on abortion alone...so it will come down to "what will you do for the country?" We saw that at the foreign policy debate where Romney was reduced to agreeing with Obama on everything.

Schweitzer is their worst nightmare. They can't attack him on guns. Or on taxes. He is one of the few politicians who understands foreign trade - he built dairy farms overseas. He understands farm policy because he's a farmer. He speaks Arabic. And he can connect with the red states.(He also looks like a NASCAR fan...well, actually he looks almost exactly like NASCAR team owner Richard Childress...so he can connect with that crowd.) The GOP is scared of him for good reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #22)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:54 PM

27. He speaks Arabic?

The right-wing will trash him and call him a Muslim sympathizer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Reply #27)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 08:38 PM

38. Or worse, anti-Israel

Because gun nuts just LOVE them some Israel...even though if they had to live under Israeli gun laws (no pistols for most Israelis and only one gun of any type for anyone, and you have to EARN the privilege of owning one) they'd commit mass seppuku in front of their favorite gun stores.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:42 AM

8. Sorry. Elizabeth Warren has my vote in 2016

Just Sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vt_native (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 07:02 AM

10. Me too! /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 08:49 AM

11. Schweitzer, Warren, Cuomo, whatever way, we and America win. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikekohr (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:44 AM

17. NO to Cuomo. Because of his and his father's anti-gay smear against Ed Koch

 

Cuomo is forever finished as a national candidate, just like his father was.
The reason he didn't get on that plane, and refused SCOTUS twice.

Thank God Ed Koch left an audio/video record of what every single person in NYC knew happened.

The single ugliest moment democrat/democrat in history.
And to think Andy says he is a liberal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #17)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:20 PM

32. I've never heard anything about this. You got a link I could check out?

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikekohr (Reply #32)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 07:10 PM

37. "Vote for Cuomo not the Homo" smear on Ed Koch in his race vs. Mario in 1977(Andrew ran that)

 


http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/koch-gay-legacy-article-1.1252984

Ed Koch, who was always private about his sex life, took a shot at former rival Mario Cuomo over ‘Homo’ ads in an interview released after his death
Koch said he always held a grudge against Mario and Andrew Cuomo for 1977 campaign signs that branded him as being gay


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/koch-gay-legacy-article-1.1252984#ixzz2Llq2W4QY

In a video interview in 2009, Koch told the NY Times that the poster incident still rankled him, "They put up signs on Queens Boulevard, the whole boulevard, it was shocking... I called Mario a weekend or two before the election and I said, 'Mario this is happening... Mario, you gotta do something about that. It's not right.' " While Cuomo told him he would try to do something, Koch said, "I don't believe he did anything." Koch reflected, "That matter has affected our relationship from '77 through this year. We get along, we got along as mayor and governor but I always held it against him. I also held it against this son Andy Cuomo. Even though social relationships when we meet in public are good, underneath he knows I know what I'm really thinking, 'You .'"

the video can be seen in the following thread-

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/10022296745

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #37)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:51 AM

39. Thanks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 08:52 AM

12. "Gun-loving" will not get him on any national D ticket.

From what I understand, he's a good politician, and there is nothing tacitly unDemocratic in owning/enjoying guns, but I don't think the gun control issue will be leaving the liberal table any time soon. If he can be painted in any way as being pro-NRA, he's sunk on the national stage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intheflow (Reply #12)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:24 PM

24. He would do well with many Dems I know

since most of them are gun owners. I get emails everyday that breathlessly go after Obama for the gun control issue from Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians. My own family is a mix of all three parties. I don't think being pro gun would be as much a liability as one would think, at least in the south. I don't know about the midwest. He would attract a lot of men to the fold I would think.He has that down home folks thing going on. I don't know how he would do with women. I am not much of a fan. I hate his stance on wolves. I would really have to hold my nose to vote for him because of it. It makes me want to scream.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/17/us-wolves-montana-idUSTRE71G0P620110217
Montana governor threat: shoot wolves now, ask questions later
By Laura Zuckerman
SALMON, Idaho | Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:44pm EST
(Reuters) - Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer declared on Wednesday he was ready to order state game officials to kill off entire wolf packs in defiance of federal protections under the Endangered Species Act.
Peace, Mojo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #24)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:41 PM

35. Yeah, but I'm talking about being a national candidate.

There are many liberals who support guns, but I would guess they're not in the majority. And of the ones who support guns, I'll bet even less of them support guns to shoot wolves. The majority of Democrats are urbanites to whom guns mean robbery and maybe deer/duck hunting. It's the rural folk who think shooting wolves are okay, and one need only look at the demographics from the last elections to know if more urban areas voted for Obama or if more rural areas did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intheflow (Reply #35)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:52 PM

36. I am not sure of state by state

but we need a lot of states other than the NE to win.
I just posted some snips of this article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/19/a-gun-ownership-renaissance/
It seems close to half the country is ok with guns in general so if the Eastern Dems and California stay with the party he might draw in enough of the indies and the Republicans who are looking at their party in horror for a national win.
I don't know enough about him to know if he comes off as Presidential. And yes, the wolf issue will be big with many or at least I would hope so. It sure is with me.
Peace, Mojo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intheflow (Reply #12)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:54 PM

26. it would be worth it to watch heads explode here

he's make a good VP for Hillary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:29 AM

13. He would be a step back on gay rights

and thus not get my vote in a primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:39 AM

16. I like Brian Schweitzer, but the current governor, Steve Bullock is a self avowed liberal.

If he can get elected in a state like Montana, there is hope.

Note: I know Steve and no one thought he could win in Montana given his progressivism. I'm so happy that he did win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 09:47 AM

18. eh....no thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:04 PM

19. Saw him in person about 6 years ago

here in Washington state. He's definitely dynamic and seems to have a good relationship with and respect the tribes in his state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:39 PM

20. I can live with his gun love--he is from Montana, where guns mean different things than in Chicago.

Single payer populist from a red state? He's everything that John Edwards was supposed to be, but he's gritty instead of shiny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:45 PM

25. Schweitzer was born in September. We need a president born in September again!

I was born in September and the last president born in that month was William Howard Taft over 100 years ago! In fact, he was the only president born in the ninth month. Why have we had three presidents born in August in just the last 50 years yet no Septembers? It's not fair!

Seriously though, I'm totally open to any non-Hillary candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:59 PM

28. Not interested --

He's a throw back, on more issues that guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:06 PM

29. Schweitzer has no chance in the Primary..

 

He would be unrecognizable to progressives in the power centers of California, Chicago, and the NE. If you can't their support, you'll never get anywhere in today's Democratic Party. He would horrify NE liberals, I don't care what his stance is. People like him just aren't Democratic Presidential material..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:07 PM

30. uh, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:24 PM

33. Meet the gun-owning San Francisco politician from San Francisco who says that she is a liberal.

 

She also supports concealed carry. Her's, that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 06:36 PM

34. Well I sure am in no mood for another Bush/Cheney cowboy presidents. I want a president

 

that can talk with leaders of other world governments. This go it alone attitude the US had under Bush/Cheney has gotten this country in a lot of trouble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #34)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 12:23 PM

40. Fun fact: Brian Schweitzer is fluent in Arabic

That might be useful for talking to leaders of other world governments, no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hippo_Tron (Reply #40)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 01:16 PM

42. That might..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 12:25 PM

41. I suspect that if he runs for President he will moderate his stance on the gun issue

Bill Clinton was somewhere between agnostic on choice and pro-life before he decided to run for President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 01:23 PM

43. He's my going in choice...

I had a private chat with him about 2016 when I was in Charlotte...yes, he's not a perfect fit for eastern liberals, but I think we're better off displaying our growth in the populist mountain states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread