Montana Politics

McKinnon goes negative

Shares


Please click HERE for a more updated post on the negative piece that was mailed out on behalf of McKinnon’s campaign.

Not a lot of attention is paid to Montana’s Supreme Court races.

In the three-way match-up between Laurie McKinnon, Ed Sheehy,  and Elizabeth Best, a lot of voters are probably at a loss as to who to vote for.  At this point, I’d say Best is most likely to win this race due to her visibility and campaign war chest.  I’d also say that Sheehy is most likely to come in second.

That hasn’t stopped McKinnon from going negative.

No doubt many readers’ mailboxes are filling up with campaign literature – a lot of it is just tossed in the trash.  However, one piece that has caught some attention is McKinnon’s recent “return your absentee ballots” mailer, which attacks both Sheehy and Best.

Please note that the highlights and underline are part of the mailer.

Attack

McKinnon attacks Sheehy and Best for being partisan Democrats; Sheehy, specifically, for suing the State of Montana to prevent the death penalty from being used in a particular case; and Best, specifically, for filing a lawsuit aimed at mitigating global warming.

It goes without saying that this attack piece is not very inspiring.

About the author

M. Storin

3 Comments

  • Get your facts straight. McKinnon did not send out this mail piece, it was from an independent group. And telling the truth is not negative. Both Sheehy and Best are Democrats and their positions reflected in the mailer are accurate.

      • I mean McKinnon did not send out this mail piece. She appears to be gathering the support of an independent group, which is perfectly entitled to support her candidacy. Now back to the issue of “independent” groups supporting judicial candidates in a few months. Are you going to imply that the Trial Lawyers PAC or whatever they are calling themselves these days are also not truly “independent” of Sheehy / Best / whomever when they buy their seat on the Court? There is one key issue that even you cannot deny: a practicing attorney in Montana who pays $50K-$100K for independent expenditures to elect a Justice to the Supreme Court has a decided advantage for his or her clients the next time their case goes to the Court. I hope you will provide scrutiny to those expenditures when they happen in a couple of months. And I am not going to start my own blog, because I prefer to interact on yours.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: