Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

cilla4progress

(24,739 posts) Sat Nov 24, 2018, 08:47 PM Nov 2018

John Tester

How come he's not talked about as a 2020 prospect? He seems to have a lot going for him!

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

John Tester (Original Post) cilla4progress Nov 2018 OP

we need him to keep a blue seat in MT loyalsister Nov 2018 #1

Yep, we need him in the Senate. Delmette2.0 Nov 2018 #2

Maybe a future Gubernatorial candidate but not President Seasider Nov 2018 #3

Trump hates him... kentuck Nov 2018 #4

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)

1. we need him to keep a blue seat in MT

Reply to cilla4progress (Original post)

Sat Nov 24, 2018, 08:51 PM

Nov 2018

It's not worth the risk when incumbency is essential for keeping a Democrat in office.

Delmette2.0

(4,167 posts)

2. Yep, we need him in the Senate.

Reply to loyalsister (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 24, 2018, 09:00 PM

Nov 2018

Veterans need him in the Senate.

Seasider

(169 posts)

3. Maybe a future Gubernatorial candidate but not President

Reply to cilla4progress (Original post)

Sat Nov 24, 2018, 09:02 PM

Nov 2018

But there's a possibility that Tester himself might throw his hat in the ring in 2020 just as I'm sure every high profile Democrat will. His surprise victory in 2006 was a big factor in getting Democrats control of the Senate when most experts predicted it wouldn't happen.

kentuck

(111,104 posts)

4. Trump hates him...

Reply to cilla4progress (Original post)

Sat Nov 24, 2018, 09:57 PM

Nov 2018

He went to Montana to personally campaign against him and Tester won.

He could beat him in the Presidential race also.

Reply to this discussion