06/16/2026
Why was a wealthy white businessman presumed to be the more serious candidate than a woman with a proven record of public service who achieved nearly the same result while spending less than one third as much?
I have thought about that question often since Montana's 2022 congressional race.
In that election, I ran against two white male millionaires. One was the Republican incumbent. The other was an Independent candidate backed by many of Montana's political and business elites. During the campaign, I was repeatedly pressured to step aside and support the Independent candidate. The pressure did not come from Republicans. It did not come from Independents. It came from Democrats who had convinced themselves that a wealthy businessman was the more electable choice.
I refused.
At the end of the race, the Independent candidate spent more than three times what I did to achieve essentially the same result.
Before running for Congress, I had spent years in public service, effectively working across local, state, and federal levels to pass policies that strengthened public safety, improved government accountability, and made our communities safer. I had earned my place on that debate stage.
Montanans say we value independence, hard work, and people who roll up their sleeves to solve problems. We pride ourselves on common sense and reject the idea that someone else knows better than we do.
At least, that is what we say.
Because when it comes time to choose our leaders, we often defer to wealth, status, and the people who assure us they know who is electable. We say we value grit over pedigree and service over privilege. Yet too often, our politics rewards the opposite.
Women are often asked to prove they belong. Wealthy men are often assumed to.
Working-class Montanans deserved authentic representation from someone who understood their lives through lived experience rather than political manipulation.
We still do.
The candidate names have changed since 2022. The manipulators' playbook has not.
In 2022, I refused to step aside because little girls deserved to see a woman on that debate stage and working-class Montanans deserved a candidate who understood their lives through lived experience.
I have never regretted that decision.
The next time someone tells Montanans who the "serious" candidates are, we should ask a simple question: Serious for whom?
Because too often, what political elites call electability is simply familiarity with power.
And every time we accept that equation without question, we make the circle of leadership smaller than it ought to be.