Gov. Gianforte is back from a trade mission in India, where he courted Indian technology, quantum computing, photonics, and pharmaceutical companies to establish operations in Montana.

He went so far as to call Montana the Indians’ “North American Beachhead” which is an interesting choice of words. A beachhead is a secured position established by an invading military force. He is going to turn Montana into Texas by importing H1B visa holders.

Call Gov. Beachhead and let him know what you think: [406-444-3111](tel:(406)%20444-3111).

This is crazy to me. I knew things were unaffordable for the middle class in Montana but I didn’t know it was this bad. I love my home state but I don’t think I’ll be able to afford to live there again. I pray that there is a reckoning this election. There is no place like Montana; it deserves better - its people deserve better.

I'm sure you've all seen the junk mail and maybe even a speech tonight warning us that "they" want boys in girls sports.

Who is this mystery group of people? I don't see anyone in Montana saying they want it. Actual, regular people, not a politician. Do any of you want it? Do you personally know someone who does?

It feels like it is a cooked up issue to scare voters into picking "R".

A satellite voting office is a location different from the main elections office, and it offers fewer services. Voters can usually register to vote or receive or drop off an absentee ballot at these locations.

Satellite locations provide an alternative to help people who may have to travel far distances to their main elections offices. These locations are more convenient for many voters and can improve access and voting turnout. 

Find a satellite location near you: https://forwardmontana.org/satellite-voting-locations/. 

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

I would like to hear from those who plan on voting for Aaron Flint to better understand the reasons in which they would like for him to be elected.

The title is the question and topic of discussion I propose for all good faith actors. Entrenchment in the problem at the center of this question seems to be the death of the possibility of politics at worst or a foreclosure of political possibility at best. In other words, the continuation of political activity is not necessarily the continuation of politics. Allow me to provide some contextual framing:

In the spirit of Hannah Arendt's conception of politics, politics requires plurality, not merely opposition. For Arendt, politics arises from the condition of human plurality: we inhabit a common world, but each of us encounters and understands that world from a different position. Politics becomes possible precisely because people are not identical in their perspectives, experiences, or judgments. What matters is that these differences can appear within a shared public space, where people speak and act in relation to one another. But consider what happens when political identity becomes something that must be defended rather than examined. A question is no longer received as an invitation to think. Instead, it is interpreted as evidence of allegiance or hostility (shibboleth via keywords and dog whistles). The person asking the question ceases to be a fellow participant in the construction of a common understanding. They become an opponent whose political identity must first be established. The conversation ceases to concern the world between people and begins to concern the classification of the people themselves; a violence of abstraction.

There is an important distinction between possessing political convictions and being unable to examine them; the substitution of identity for judgment. Political convictions are not inherently opposed to dialectical inquiry. In fact, they can make inquiry more meaningful because participants have substantive commitments to test against the world. The problem emerges when political identity becomes the criterion by which arguments are evaluated. Rather than asking, 'Is this proposition true?,' participants begin asking, 'Whose proposition is this?' Rather than examining whether an institution realizes its professed principles, participants attempt to determine whether the questioner is a Democrat, Republican, or some other kind of political actor.

The order of reasoning is reversed:

• In deliberative politics, judgments about claims help inform political commitments.
• In entrenched identity-based argumentation, political commitments predetermine judgments about claims.

This does not eliminate reasoning. People can construct elaborate justifications for their existing positions. But reasoning increasingly becomes instrumental to the preservation of identity rather than a means of revising understanding.

Jacques Rancière provides another useful perspective. For Rancière, politics involves disruptions of an established distribution of roles, identities, and legitimate forms of speech. Politics occurs when people challenge who is entitled to speak, what counts as a political question, and which possibilities can be considered. A question, statement, or act that momentarily refuses an established classification triggers an attempt to restore the familiar structure: Which side are you on? What position are you defending? Why are you criticizing Democrats rather than Republicans? It beckons a reorientation; it threatens to escape the established coordinates of disagreement, and the conversation works to return it to those coordinates. In Rancière's terms, one could interpret this as the suppression of a political interruption by the existing order of intelligibility. With this appearance of legibility comes the disappearance of the political possibility.

Political identities arise historically through disagreement, negotiation, conflict, and collective action. Yet once established, those same identities can become obstacles to the processes through which they originally emerged. A political movement that once represented a challenge to an established order may eventually become invested in preserving its own institutional identity. The same phenomenon can occur at the individual level.

Someone identifies with a political movement because its principles reflect their understanding of the world. Over time, however, their understanding of the world may become subordinate to preserving their identification with the movement. What originally resulted from judgment becomes a substitute for judgment. An appearance of a paradox: an identity produced through political engagement becomes a condition that restricts political engagement.

A final thought

From an Arendtian or deliberative-democratic perspective, entrenched identities can undermine the possibility of politics as a shared activity of judgment, speech, and collective action. From other traditions, particularly those emphasizing antagonism, conflict itself remains constitutive of politics. Chantal Mouffe, for example, distinguishes between antagonism, in which opponents are treated as enemies whose legitimacy is denied, and agonism, in which adversaries recognize one another's legitimate place within a shared political order. Her position is not that politics should transcend partisan commitments. Rather, democratic politics requires ways of expressing genuine conflict without converting political opponents into existential enemies. That distinction is useful here. The danger is not that people possess strong political identities or passionately disagree. It is that disagreement becomes incapable of producing anything other than the reaffirmation of identities already held.

Under those conditions, political discourse becomes repetitive rather than generative. Politics becomes impossible not when disagreement becomes irreconcilable, but when disagreement loses its capacity to disclose possibilities that did not exist within the participants' prior understanding.

Great column from Jopek today in the Flathead Beacon

https://flatheadbeacon.com/2026/10/14/loose-change/?
Big-money politics, ballot anxiety and the cost of living in Montana

I walked up the driveway and reached into the mailbox. There it was. The mail that I’ve been waiting on for the past couple of years, since the world turned to chaos, arrived.
I pulled out the ballot and held onto it like money. Life had gotten so expensive over the past few years that change is the only option. No working guy can afford to live in Montana under these kinds of price increases. And the yes-men who’ve been running politics don’t care.
I’m voting for Minnie Mouse and will hand-deliver my choice to the Whitefish City Hall where a ballot box has been established to avoid postal complications. I foolishly anticipate that if the ballot reaches the secure location sooner, the moneyed bullies of the election will leave us alone.
I chuckle, knowing this is untrue. Miserably, bullies will bully until the very end, and then blame everyone for their own foolishness long after the votes are counted and scores settled. If you desire a kinder and gentler world, do as I do and fill out your ballot and vote for change.
What an ugly election season this year has been. The D.C. insiders and tech billionaires are dumping unlimited play money into the local consultant-world expecting results. Who knows, maybe big money wins again, as cash does the talking and makes people into instant celebrities.
A Democratic-controlled political action committee from D.C. spent millions of dollars promoting a Democratic candidate in the primary election only to immediately backtrack once she decisively won and then weirdly declared that the woman cannot win come November.
Suddenly, another Democratic political group from D.C. then spent millions more of someone’s dollars to say ugly and untruthful things about her and then weirdly pivoted to support the opposition. Democratic consultants spent millions to prop up, then millions to tear down.
Of course, and on schedule, the Republican-controlled political team from D.C. joined the fray and dumped millions of their dark, dirty money into Montana. It’s a game to the big-money interest, but for the rest of us it’s real life and expensive living over the past decade.
Those out-of-staters dumped so much money into this election, making up lies and half-truths, that the ordinary voter will feel rather disenfranchised. It’s ugly stuff and the Montanans involved in this big-money gambit should be ashamed. They’re not, rather laughing all the way to the bank.
The political establishment is lost, awash in dirty money. They no longer care for the everyday Montanan. We’re on our own and I’ve voted like it matters, like it’s the last real election ever. Certainly, the most important election of my lifetime. I realize that dad and grandma had tougher days but they seemed stronger to me.
Yet, I still believe that Minnie is the right person, full of grace and ambition, and will steer this ship called America back to port. We’ve been lost at sea for so long that sending another Mickey to fix the mess of the last Mickey won’t produce change or make life less expensive. As everyone knows, Minnie is used to cleaning up Mickey’s mess.
During my years in Helena, I saw politics and elected officials up close. I’ve come to the sad realization that power does corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely, just like the adage reminds us. Our daily drama is playing out on the statewide stage. The theater is real, not funny.
To fix it, do like I did. Fill out the ballot and get it to the election office as fast as possible. The mailers won’t stop, the commercials will continue, and those weird phone calls from God only knows where will keep ringing. But once the ballot is complete, you become the observer.
The tech-bro billionaires and political bullies will keep pestering and insisting that only they know what’s right. They’re wrong. But it won’t matter. You voted. Your civic duty done.
So, I voted for Minnie Mouse. Big money bullied her, locals made up lies about her, and loudmouths insisted that the only female running in a statewide political race should drop out. That’s nutty. Everyone knows the women are smarter. Just open the ears and listen to politics.
Anyone who knows Minnie recognizes that she’s fiercely independent, sensible and level-headed. She’s feisty and strong-willed. She may have started as a flapper girl but quickly learned to fly. Today most of us like Minnie because she’s humane and optimistic. And Minnie gets stuff done.
Any politician who’s kind and forward-looking in today’s world deserves support. I realize you may disagree and vote for Goofy or Pluto. And that’s exactly how democracy works. Yet most everyone will agree that in today’s expensive economy, the nation and state need change.
If you think that Montana needs fewer yes-men or bootlickers in power, then you have a civic duty to return your ballot and vote for the person best suited to make living just a little bit easier and a whole lot less expensive. Putting in the same team to clean up the mess that they themselves made is pointless. Only change and accountability produce freedom.
The column you read is true. The names were changed to protect the innocent, and to spare me from more nasty comments from the big-money bullies of politics. I believe in you, and as Sgt. Joe Friday said on Dragnet, “All we want are the facts, ma’am.”

Join Last Best Voice with support from Billings Climate Coalition for Montana’s 2026 U.S. Senate Town Hall, free and open to the public! Candidates Kurt Alme (R), Kyle Austin (L), Alani Bankhead (D), and Seth Bodnar (I) will discuss issues related to water, energy, public lands, and more! There will also be a live auction to win two tickets to the Country Music Awards in November. 

When: Sunday, October 18 6:30-8 PM
Where: Lincoln Center Auditorium in Billings, MT

We can’t wait to see you there!

I started this piece trying to find out whether Bankhead is a "plant," as some Democrats have said.

I found no evidence of that: no payment to her, no contact, no arrangement in any filing or report I could open.

What I found was who paid for the ads.
Progressive Vet PAC registered five weeks before the primary from a print-and-ship store in Billings. Nearly all its money came from Contours, Inc., a nonprofit with a one-page website. Voters didn't learn that until June 20, after the June 2 primary. The same group funded a committee promoting Bodnar and paid for a poll saying the best path was a head-to-head with him. The PAC shut down four weeks after she won.

Bankhead's campaign answered my questions on the record, and their answers are in the piece. Everyone else I asked is listed, with who replied.
Full article with every source linked: https://www.callthemap.com/news/nobodys-candidate

Montana’s modern identity is forged from a gritty libertarian toughness conjured from personal freedom, self-reliance and rugged individualism that sneers at those who cave to collective thought and bow to the powerful establishment.

So, welcome to the 2026 U.S. Senate race in Montana.

When former University of Montana President Seth Bodnar decided to run as an “independent” for the U.S. Senate, he and his team made a grave strategic error – they failed to account for human nature in politics.

Bodnar derides Democrats and Republicans as beholden to some mysterious cabal of insiders, elites and party bosses who he alleges pull the strings of partisans. Bodnar’s team, ironically, is composed mostly of Democratic insiders, elites and party bosses.

Other than opposing party politics, Bodnar has failed to outline what independents stand for. Meanwhile, a handful of Democratic establishment figures have tagged the Democratic Party brand as toxic. They unilaterally made the decision to wave the flag of political surrender and run from the Democratic Party to win by dressing their candidate – Bodnar – in independent garb.

The result: Bodnar and his backers angered a significant slice of Democratic voters and workers who have fought for decades for Montanans and now will never vote for him.

The physics of emotion holds that if you insult and hit someone, expect to be insulted and hit back. And expect not to be liked. Politics is driven as much or more by emotion rather than logic and reason.

The heart in politics is stronger than the mind; it’s the engine room that beats strongly enough to keep political hope alive. Changing the hearts and transforming the minds of Montana Democrats is something that can’t be done without the political spadework – persuasion and grassroots organizing – that Bodnar folks failed to do.

After disparaging partisanship as bad, Bodnar supporters chose to aggressively bully the Democratic U.S. Senate nominee and her supporters to try to force her to drop out of the race and back him.

Democrats who backed Bodnar assumed that more Montana Democrats would simply roll over, without question, and commit to support an independent while rejecting the Democratic nominee. The arrogance of these Bodnar supporters made Democrats recoil and strike back, and to refuse to go along with this insider political trading powered by billionaires, Dark Money and trickery.

Bodnar and his supporters now have resorted to tearing down the Democratic nominee to try to gain Democratic votes in an election landscape that’s now favorable to the party.

But enough Montana Democrats pushed back in disgust, and most importantly, Senate nominee Alani Bankhead, refused to capitulate to these ham-handed bullying tactics and remained in the race.

As one national journalist remarked, “I like Montana Democrats: They’re feisty.”

And, whether you like it or not, Bankhead won the Montana Democratic Senate primary.

As part of some national experiment, Democrats in other states – Nebraska, Idaho and South Dakota – surrendered, and candidates who won the Democratic primary stepped aside for so-called independents who were former Democrats. They gave up – quit.

Bodnar’s strategy won’t work in Montana, where citizens revere freedom and exhibit a populist streak of independence from the elites and outside powers.

Why? Because it’s hard to whack a Montana Democrat in the head and expect them to like you – and, no less, vote for you. They’d rather fight than quit.

Stay feisty, my Democratic friends.

Bill Lombardi lives in Seeley Lake.

I've lived in Montana all 33 of my years. I grew up in cattle country, was educated in Bozeman, and have spent most of my career serving our poor and impoverished neighbors. I've spent a lot of time trying to understand my neighbors, trying to love them, trying to understand their beliefs rather than fight them. So when I talk of politics with my neighbors, I'm not tied to anyone's doctrine, not willing to burn at either party's stake; I just get to observe and listen.

What I've observed is that Montanans have proven election after election that we would do anything other than vote (D). Look at our federal lineup: we voted in a big group of millionaires from California and Minnesota all so we wouldn't have to support a Democrat. There is no way a majority are going to elect Alani Bankhead; she needs to drop out.

You can feel with every cell of your body that the right thing to do is to elect a Democrat or elect a woman or elect a Christian life coach, but even if those feelings are grounded in sound moral and ethical reasoning, those feelings are still going to lose you an important election. If you are going to play the game of politics, it's time to play the level you are on, not the level you think you should be on. It's time to appeal to the neighbors you have, not just the neighbors you like and agree with.

Our conservative neighbors aren't mindless, they aren't blind to the ways their world has gotten worse for them these last 20 months, and they aren't dumb. They like being straight, white, and Christian. It's a world that feels safe; it's a world that is expected and predictable. It's a world they don't want changed. They believe to their core that the Democratic agenda is to remove them from the comfort of their predictable life. They believe they are protecting their way of life from someone who would destroy it.

You can hate the sentiment, want to cry about how unfair it is, but it's the world they know and the world they will continue to vote for. There is no Democrat in Montana who is well-spoken enough, smart enough, or capitulating enough to change a lifetime of that thinking. Delusional hope can't fight deep cultural ideas but it sure can be used to ignore pretty clear statistics about the likelihood of Alani being elected.

But when Bankhead stays in the race and splits the anti-Trump vote in half to hand the election over, the Dems will prove themselves the most blankheaded bunch of hopefully delusional dumdums to ever hold a platform of education and reason.

Vote your mind and the mind of those nonvoting. Hold party line only if the message is one of a different, better way. More of the same is getting kind of old (no pun intended). Minions to the mindset that hold steadfast to beliefs that make sense to non montanans or policies above the means of montanans got us in an ever-outsider governance. We all know what 'got us here' refers to. A general devisive malaise beyond simple disagreement has oozed its way into our towns and created a seasonal service economy to dominate communities. The disparity between the normies and our new residents lured by the wide open, Hollywood depiction and naive labor force taints what used to be.

Watching this debate tonight. As I did the other day, I thought I’d post it here to share my thoughts and see what other Montanans think.

Those of you in District 41 (Helena) don't have to abstain or hold your nose and vote for a uniparty candidate.

Raised on an Eastern Montana farm, Dru is a business owner and homeschool mom with Montana roots stretching back generations. She knows the value of hard work—and believes government should keep its hands out of your pockets.

Dru is running for peace, prosperity, and justice: a nation at peace, a community where families can afford homes and health care, and equal justice regardless of political connections. She believes courts should focus on real harm, not victimless crimes.

An advocate for free markets and private property rights, Dru’s loyalty is to her neighbors and her Helena community—not party lines or political favors.

Vote Dru Koester and get involved with the Montana Libertarian Party!

I don't care if I'm accused of being a plant or responsible for ruining democracy pointing this out. Whatever. There's some "rounding-up" for 20 years of experience considering that would've made Bankhead 14 years old when she entered the scene. Was she doing decoys for Chris Hansen [To Catch A Predator] or something? /s

Also, I find it really odd that it says "US Senate Candidate (MT)" but I find it odd to not follow the typical AP Style guideline,

[Party Affiliation-State], eg. Bankhead (D-MT).

I know people also like to "self-censor" in the name of not "getting banned" on socials—but not spelling out "sex" in reference to "hunting s*x abusers" for 20 years is very weird.

I am quite curious about the Planned Parenthood endorsement debacle. Not a good look when I went to find her statement on this and the whole thing was inaudible—right after she starts off talking about clear communication.

I find the apparently PPH support and the announcement of their new Bozeman facility quite… a coincidence? No doubt there seems to be some dark monies and big strings pulled. Lots of changes in Bozeman are making me raise a brow lately tho. Neither here nor there—but it does feel like possibly pandering and an unfounded gut feeling that there have been behind the scenes happenings collaborating? I'd love if someone commented, "no Bozeman PPH has been in the works for years." I tried to do a brief search and saw the Bozeman Chronicle has a new

Either way, it's great news—PPH is far more than just birth control and abortion access. I would post screenshot but, you can go to her Facebook page and read it yourself.

Good thing I'm still grieving and processing Nov 2024—the illusion of choice in this clusterf*ck is a fever dream. Cannot believe this is where we are. Yay.

It is an insult to every working family in Billings that the Boys and Girls Club of Yellowstone County is pursuing visa sponsorship for a leadership role instead of hiring a Montanan.

The facts are simple: They filed an H-1B labor-condition application for a Program Director with a salary of $49,254. The national median for the occupational category they selected—Social and Community Service Managers—is $80,390. That is nearly 40% below the national median.

Before anyone calls this a shortage of “qualified” candidates, show us the recruitment. Offering a salary that far below the national occupational median raises an obvious question: Is there a worker shortage, or an unwillingness to offer pay that would attract a local professional? Most H-1B employers aren’t required to recruit Americans first.

This is a position that serves our children. The community deserves to know why a local organization is pursuing visa sponsorship rather than hiring someone already living and working in this county.

While this is happening on the ground, Governor Greg Gianforte is traveling to India to promote business partnerships and opportunities “both here in India and back in the United States.” Where is the push to recruit and train Montanans for jobs in their own communities?

The Boys and Girls Club owes us an explanation. Who applied for this job? Where was it advertised? And why should “community service” mean bypassing the local community rather than giving its workers a fair shot?

Our children deserve leaders invested in our town, and our workers deserve a fair shot at their own local economy.

Source for the filing: U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Foreign Labor Certification, case I-200-25315-398483, filed November 11, 2025, and certified November 18, 2025. Offered salary: $49,254 annually; requested employment period: January 19, 2026–January 18, 2029. Record supplied above.

Do you think Alani Bankhead is going to win the Senate race?

Are you an online warrior rallying for her support and debunking any and all criticisms of her on every platform you can?

Do you think questions of her background, character, policies and qualifications are just baseless accusations made by the elite out of state ruling class?

Well, lucky for you, this is your chance to strike it big!

According to Kalshi’s latest market prediction, Bankhead has a .6% chance of winning!

https://kalshi.com/markets/senatemt/montana-senate-race/senatemt-26

That means, if you put a dollar down for every word you type for Alani -or hell, just $1000, or $100, or $10, or even just ONE DOLLAR, your winning will be multiplied by… LOTS! I’m not a betting man, but I know these odds mean you’ll be rich by most people’s definition!

So put your money where your mouth is and get ready to WIN! in more ways than one!