A _____ Can't Win

Opinions that somehow catch fire

William Goldman, the author of Lord of the Flies, as well as many successful screenplays, including Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, once said when asked what makes a great movie, “Nobody knows anything.”

In other words, if anyone could predict exactly what works, making a blockbuster film, or writing a bestselling novel, would be much easier. The same could apply to the political landscape, where just when we think it’s impossible for someone like Donald Trump to win an election, we find ourselves mired in a ten-plus year nightmare that started with his shocking victory in 2016.

I travel around my state a lot, and I’m always picking other peoples’ brains to figure out where everyone else is getting their ideas about what’s going on in our country, as well as the state of Montana. And it’s been discouraging to hear people latching onto a couple of old narratives that won’t seem to die. One of them is that a woman can never win an election for president. Or for any major office in Montana. I’ve heard this statement from some of the most progressive people I know, and it makes my teeth hurt every time. Because…nobody knows anything!

There was a time when all the pundits predicted with great certainty that an African American could never be president. There was even a time when the experts were absolutely certain that it was impossible for a Catholic to become president. Needless to say, neither of these absolutes proved to be true.

But people still take these statements in their teeth and hang onto them with a determination that leaves no room for compromise. It is especially maddening in Montana, where we actually elected the first woman to ever serve in Congress, and it happened before women were even allowed to vote. Jeannette Rankin won her first term in 1916, three years before the 19th Amendment was passed. Politics is and always has been very unpredictable, so for people to insist that a Democrat can’t win in Eastern Montana, or that a woman will never become a senator is just putting undue limitations on a system that has no limits.

This year’s Democratic primary has brought experts out of the wordwork, claiming that the Democrats don’t have a chance in this senate election, despite the fact that Trump’s disastrous second term is turning countless Republicans against the party. And the race has become even more complicated by a cowardly decision by a guy who probably had a very good chance to win the Democratic primary, Seth Bodnar, deciding to run as an Independent, a decision that makes no sense. Bodnar is being advised and guided by many of the same people who ran Jon Tester’s last run for the Senate, which also makes little sense since Tester lost that race. That is also the same team that broke records for campaign financing, and as Tester was willing to admit himself, it meant a lot of dark money. And yet somehow, during the primary season, most of the rumors about dark money fell on one of the Democrats, who raised a small fraction of what Bodnar is raising.

Another thing that’s confusing to me is the fact that much of the disillusionment about politics revolves around people thinking the two parties keep presenting the same old stereotype in terms of candidates—namely, rich white guys. Well guess who is one more rich white guy? Bodnar made his mark as an executive with General Electric.

So while many Democrats refused to vote in the primaries because they’re throwing their support to a man who won’t even commit to one side or the other, Alani Bankhead made a remarkable run to beat her closest competitor by over ten points. And she did so despite constant rumors that she’s nothing more than a plant, and that she was supported by dark money. There were some ads run by PACs, ads that she did not endorse or approve. But there is no evidence whatsoever that Bankhead entered this race under some kind of backroom agreement that she will back out and throw her support to Bodnar. One of the facts that people who continue to repeat that narrative overlook is that if Bankhead dropped out, it is the responsibility of the Democratic party to name a replacement, so it isn’t as if there would be no Democrat running. Meanwhile, with Bodnar, whose beliefs line up much more firmly with Democratic voters, will surely rip any chance of Bankhead winning from her grasp if he stays in the race. Which makes Tester’s support very troubling to me, especially as someone who has always been a fan. I am still astounded that Montana gave up having one of the most respected and highly ranked senators for a guy who can’t even tell the truth about a bullet wound. Another millionaire. We don’t need more of those.

I also need to point out that Bodnar, who settled a lawsuit for sexual discrimination while president at the University of Montana, made the boneheaded decision to run an ad soon after the primaries that showed him running almost even with Republican candidate Kurt Alme. For months, Bodnar and his people, who have refused to address the specifics of that lawsuit, have been trying to convince us that it was not him who brought about this lawsuit. And yet in one of the first ads his team puts out, they don’t even acknowledge the only woman in the race. If nothing else, it was a serious lack of judgement on the part of Bodnar’s team. Nobody thought of how bad this would look?

I am among many Montana Democrats who are calling for Bodnar to do the right thing and give our strong Democratic candidate the room she needs to run as effective a campaign as she did for the primaries.