Montana U.S. Senate- Race of the Day

60 Days Until Election Day

Montana U.S. Senate

Status: Republican Open 

2024 Presidential Result: Red State (West)

 

Outlook: Leans Republican

 

When the year 2026 began, someone could have made a lot of money by predicting that the Senate race in Montana could be decided by two candidates named Alme and Bodnar, That appears to be the top two contenders at least for this state and if it were a one on one matchup, Republicans could be in even greater danger of losing a Senate seat they once considered very secure. Things happen to be a bit more complicated though out in Big Sky Country and if Democrats were to say fall one seat short of a Senate majority, there could be a lost of frustration about Montana.

Democrats used to dominate the state in federal elections, but as the country as whole became more divided between red and blue, Montana definitely became more Republican. Two years ago, Senator Jon Tester, who had defeated a Republican incumbent in the midterm year of 2006 and then hung on to win two highly targeted reelection campaigns, finally lose his seat in a Presidential election year. Tester not only lost, he was defeated by over seven points. It would seem to be a long time before another Montana Democrat could win statewide again (one of the two Congressional districts is theoretically more winnable.) With all that in mind, it seemed doubtful that Tester, a one time populist hero on the left, who maintained a relatively moderate voting record in the Senate, would heed any calls to try to make a 2026 comeback against his former colleague Steve Daines. The Republican had chaired his party's Senate campaign committee in the cycle where Tester was defeated.

 

In the new Congress, Daines thought about running for Majority Leader, and might have gotten Donald Trump's support if he had. While he did not do that, he did seem to be in a very favorable position to win a third term. In 2020, the incumbent knocked off Montana's Democrat Governor, who was recruited into that race, after a brief Presidential bid, by 10 points. Thus, it came as a shock in March, when with just minutes left in the filing deadline to run in the state's June primary, Senator Daines released a video pulling the plug on his reelection campaign. Besides for the obligatory words about wanting to spend more time with his family, he did not really give too many details about this sudden change. Clearly though, Daines had been working behind the scenes. With the deadline literally moments away, there would be chance for one of the state's Members of Congress or a statewide elected official to file to run. Instead, Daines had already endorsed a successor, who was in on the secret, and Donald Trump and likely the Senate leadership, were in on it too and ready to back up that endorsement.

 

Not many political junkies in 49 states or perhaps Montana itself had heard the name Kurt Alme. He had never run for office before but was serving as the U.S. Attorney for Montana, the same job he had in the first Trump Administration. In the time between, he worked for the Governor as the budget director. Now, Alme would have to resign his post in the Justice Department to run for Senate and introduce himself to Montana voters. Many believed that the Republican label alone would be enough to carry the day in what had become a reliably red state. A couple of fairly little known primary challengers were already running for the seat against Daines, but Alme won what had become an open seat primary with 76 percent of the vote.

 

Not long at all before Daines' surprise announcement, the contest to oppose him had already had a bit of a twist to it. As is the case in some other states this year, and as has been seen in places like Nebraska and Utah in recent cycles, an Independent was running against a Republican in a state where being a Democrat is considered a political hindrance. In this case, it was Seth Bodnar, a former Rhodes Scholar, Army veteran, and business executive who been serving as President of the University of Montana before getting into this race. Furthermore, former Senator Tester was the one who had been pushing Bodnar to run as an Independent. A leaked text showed Tester had referred to the party label of Democrats as "poison." I would also say that had Tester known that Daines would not run again, he probably regretted not running again in 2026 himself.

 

Bodnar has been raising a lot of money in this campaign and also has won support from a bipartisan group of people including former Democrat Senator Max Baucus and former Republican Governor Marc Racicot. He is running as a non-partisan centrist alternative to Donald Trump's party and insists he would remain an Independent on Capitol Hill and not caucus with either party. (Saying that is perhaps easier said than done for logistical purposes.) It was very clear though that if Democrats wanted their best chance to stop a pro-Trump Republican from winning the election, backing the independent candidacy of Bodnar would be the strongest option.

 

Would rank and file Democrats play along though, the way they have this year in Nebraska and also now in Idaho and South Dakota? Not exactly. Five candidates were running in the primary, but there would certainly be pressure on the winner to withdraw their name from the general election ballot. A Native American candidate finished in third place with 13 percent behind two women, both of whom said they would not leave the race.  Former State Representative Reilly Neill, who easily had the mos campaign cash took 33 percent, losing to retired Air Force Lt. Colonel and Iraq War veteran Alani Bankhead who took 44 percent. Bankhead, who held a job as a sort of leadership coach, raised very little money in her run, but was helped by outside spending on behalf of veterans' groups.

 

Democrats continued to hold out hope that Bankhead would see the big financial discrepancy and the political writing on the wall and withdraw from the race. The deadline to do so continued to tick down week by week and there was some confusion over if she would actually do it. The candidate though insisted that she would not, and that she deserved some support for being the real Democrat in the race. Bankhead is definitely to the left ideologically of Bodnar. She even said he was "the last person" she would drop out in favor it citing an issue involving female university employees who alleged discrimination during Bodnar's tenure and who would receive a settlement. This stubbornness on behalf of the little known Bankhead, the duly nominated candidate of their party,  has greatly disturbed many Montana Democrats and those elsewhere, considering the stakes of this election, the expected closeness of the balance of power, and the political reality of winning a race in Montana. Some of wondered if Bnakhead is truly a secret MAGA agent trying to help a Republican, in this case Alme, win a Senate seat over a divided primary. I surmise she is merely a left-wing Democrat who thinks anyone who might be a "moderate" is unacceptable to start and thus it makes no difference if a Republican wins the seat, or someone who may or may not formally caucus with Democrats. Whatever her mindset it, it is shortsighted.

In this national political environment, Republicans are carrying a heavier burden on economic and foreign policy issues, even in a place like Montana, and perhaps even more so now because of unprecedented disputes with neighboring Canada. Alme has no electoral track record to speak of, and all sorts of people criticized the "backroom deal" that got him onto the ballot. Such actions have happened before in places like Chicago for U.S. House races, but it was a pretty near development in Montana. The fact though that two different major candidates (plus a Libertarian) are running against Alme complicates the math needed to defeat him.

 

Clearly, either Bondar or Bankhead would stand a better chance if the other were off the field. The polls are showing the Republican at just around 45 percent while the others split the difference. Most recently, Bodnar has moved ahead of the Democrat nominee in these polls, which is perhaps not a surprise, considering his financial advantage and greater institutional support, including among so many prominent Democrats. These polls are also showing that in a race against Bankhead, and the Libertarian which might cost Republicans support as it has in Montana's recent past, Alme would be ahead by a sizable margin. On the other hand, Alme vs. Bodnar plus the Libertarian would be a virtual dead heat. There are simply a lot of Montana voters who will not vote for a Democrat (especially someone as to the left as Bankhead appears to be) but would vote for an Independent.

The deadline has passed and four candidates will be on the ballot. If all continue to run active campaigns, Alme is probably going to win, even if he barely breaks 40 percent. The only alternative would be if Bankhead's support totally falls off and Democrats are pragmatic enough to unify behind Bondar. Pragmatism in politics seems to be in short supply these days though. Until the very end, a lot of people (myself included) who want to see checks and balances against MAGA will hope that Bankhead will eventually at least stop running an active campaign in order to boost Bodnar but that seems doubtful too.

I wonder though, have Barack Obama or George Clooney even picked up a telephone?

 

 

Senate races predicted thus far: 

 7 D (3 Safe, 1 Likely, 2 Leans, 1 Tossup)

12 R (2 Safe, 4 Likely, 3 Leans, 3 Tossup)

 

Senate total predicted thus far:

41 D (34 holdover, 3 Safe, 1 Likely, 2 Leans, 1 Tossup) 

43 R (31 holdover, 2 Safe, 4 Likely, 3 Leans, 3 Tossup)