That's why I said supporting the Republican candidate in Montana would help to undercut their current narrative.
"Strategic".
I think you got an extra knot in the pretzel. You aren't going to win with the media, only the people, and if you convince the people, the media will get chipped away at. This was not the hill to die on. Why?
Electing the Democrat would have been spewed by the media as a twofer, for sure, (they'd have painted that as anti-Trump, pro mediot), but I don't see it as a national referendum on anything, just replacing a Congressman.
Electing the Republican only comes off as something the MSM will pitch later as evidence that 'those hicks from the hills (and possibly Republicans in general) are violent thugs', and puts a RINO in Congress.
(Sounds like a great day to go fishing.)