The latest WCAX poll: Symington and Pollina tied (and Douglas's strategy revealed?)

Vermont Loya Jurga (0.00 / 0)

Where are the tribal chiefs of the Democratic and Progressive(Independent) tribes that could find a resolution ,broker a deal ? ......

---

by: BP @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:14:20 AM UTC

A deal ain't gonna happen now. (0.00 / 0)

Pollina will demand that he deserves Democratic support despite the fact he's been working against Dems.  Symington will not concede because she's still polling higher than Pollina.  There's no way to broker a deal that way.  

Plus, Anthony's non-Prog supporters may peel back to Douglas.  

No wonder the Bennington Banner is stirring up the muck.  They want to see a Douglas win.  

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:42:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Little optimism and no justice to celebrate (0.00 / 0)

Heh! Loya jurga ,co-operate.What was I thinking ?

---

by: BP @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 10:27:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Loya jirga -- nice reference. (0.00 / 0)

A Pashtun assembly for Pashtun's, although others are allowed to sit in.  From Wikipedia:

The words loya (great/grand) and jirga ("council", "assembly", "dispute" or "meeting") are of Turco-Mongolian origin[citation needed] and originally it means in the Mongolian and Turkic language "great tent" (jirga meaning tent).

Such meetings originate from the Altaïc cultures from the Mongolian Empire. In Afghanistan, the loya jirga was originally attended only by Pashtun groups, but later included other ethnic groups.  When the Afghans took power they tried to legitimize their power with such a Jirga. While in the beginning only Pashtuns were allowed to participate in the Jirgas, later other ethnic groups like Tajiks and Hazaras were allowed to participate as well, however they were little more than observers.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:29:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Despite GMD Pollina gains ground (2.67 / 6)

Gee, Imagine all those who trashed Pollina and said he had no support (or I mean less than ten percent)had spent their time in a more productive manner. While all thes negative politics has been transpiring Pollina has been able to gain ground despite not having a major party endorsement, months of being called A LOSER, not raising money like the other candidates, being ignored by the media(or buried on bottom of articles), and not being invited to debates from organizations like the Vermont League of Cities and Towns. If people are so committed on removing Jim Douglas and are really progressive they will vote Pollina.

and furthermore not from me but from the Bennington Banner(not known for its progressive idealism)

It seems incredible that the Democrats and Progressives could not have come to an agreement to back one or the other. Many Vermonters would have preferred that route. And based on what we have seen thus far, we believe that Mr. Pollina is the candidate who should be matched head-to-head with Governor Douglas.

But if you truly support Gaye Symington go ahead and vote it, but if you are like myself and many other Vermonters and want to see a change you will vote for Pollina.

---

by: RobbKidd @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:14:40 AM UTC

That's fine. (2.75 / 4)

Vote however you want. But pimping non-democratic candidates is not what we do on this blog.
This is a democratic site, with a mission to support Democratic candidates.
other sites are not so specifically partisan.
If you want to stump for Pollina, I suggest you don't do it here.

Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:06:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

pimp away (4.00 / 2)

Robb can plug for Pollina all he wants as far as I'm concerned, but attacking me by saying that I dont't want change because I support Symington is not really helping his cause.

---

by: greenvtster @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 13:06:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No (4.00 / 2)

Robb's not writing a FP diary touting Pollina, he's free to comment as he wishes. I'd like to think we can tolerate dissent around here. Jeezus.

That said, I still firmly believe Polina won't get out of the single digits.

But I wrote this whole race off long ago once I saw who the choices were, so why listen to me, right?

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:59:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In the end there can be only one. (4.00 / 2)

About 2 weeks ago, I just said, "Screw it, it doesn't matter because we're getting Doesless back" and voted for Diamondstone.  

---

by: annikee @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 21:34:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

asdf (4.00 / 2)

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 21:37:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"As far as you're concerned" (0.00 / 2)

does not matter as long as you are not a GMD admin.
The mission statement is what it is. Those who do not like it may blog elsewhere.

Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:06:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow. (0.00 / 2)

You are a sad, sad person.

---

by: Migraine @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 03:50:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If Pollina finishes second or third (4.00 / 1)

...he still doesn't get to be governor.  

There is no "place" or "show" proposition in this race.

There will be one winner, and two losers.  

I'm betting the winner is Does-less.  

Way to go, losers.

---

by: Undamned Yankee @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 10:39:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually... (4.00 / 5)

...there will be a whole hell of a lot more than two losers.

Musician, Web Designer, Photographer

---

by: JulieWaters @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 11:17:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well Put (4.00 / 4)

Try about 690,000 people.

---

by: Scott_C @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:09:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's really funny ... (0.00 / 2)

how RobbKidd's post recieved:

1) a troll rating from kestrel.
2) 'drags down the discussion' from Nate.


It's over at http://ramabahama.net ... only it's still under construction (but so is the rest of my life)

---

by: Rama Schneider @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 13:11:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's a Democratic blog. Did you not get the memo, Rama? (0.00 / 2)

Support for candidates from other parties running against Dems will receive a trollrating from me here.

Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:08:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooo (0.00 / 0)

It's over at http://ramabahama.net ... only it's still under construction (but so is the rest of my life)

---

by: Rama Schneider @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 17:14:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Legislature should support Symington, no excuses. (3.50 / 2)

Here's an argument that makes sense for the Legislature to justify a Symington administration no matter what.  

But do our Democratic legislators have the political courage to do this?

No matter what the outcome is, the Democratic majority should support Gaye Symington for two reasons:

First, since Jim Douglas has vetoed every major bill they have sent to him, no Vermonter can expect them to support the candidate who has blamed them, castigated them, worked against them, and does nothing to facilitate the legislative process.  A Legislative gimmie to Douglas would be shooting themselves and their constituents in the foot for another two years.  

The political response to constituents, the press and every one else is this:  "How can you expect me to work with Governor Douglas when he won't work with me?  After blaming Legislature for everything, after working against us for 6 years, after stopping Vermonters from achieving any goal whatsoever, how can I be expected to support Jim Douglas?  Look, he's treated us like Vemont's ugly cousin.  

How would you vote if your boss publicly blamed you for everything that went wrong in the company, while taking credit for your ideas and the hard work you delivered?  Would you want to work with him again if you had the opportunity to work for someone else?  

What comes around goes around, and Jim Douglas will not get my support after 6 years of working against me.

For this reason, they need to promote the House Speaker to the executive office.  Then Vermont government will end 6 years of gridlock.  Gaye Symington is the only candidate with a proven track record of achievement in policy-making and working with Republicans, Progressives, and Democrats.  We need a governor who can work with all three parties in order to get the work done that needs to be done immediately.

Second, Gaye Symington is a Democrat and if there is any purpose for the existence of a major political party, it is to support it's candidate.  The Democratic majority will be negligent to its base and unworthy of financial support if they support any other party candidate.  

The political response is simple.  To hard-core Republicans and Progressives:  Boo-hoo, wah, wah.  You know damn Progressive legislators will only vote for Pollina, so why should Dems be expected to vote for anyone but Gaye Symington?  You also know damn well Republicans will only vote for Douglas, so why should Democrats vote for anyone other than their candidate.

The political response to constituents is the response to reason #1:  "Why should I support Douglas when he doesn't support me?"  

Here's the nut, or lack of it.  This decision will take political courage and ongoing political fortitude.  Do our Democratic legislators have that courage?  If any Democratic legislator was in Gaye's position now, how would they vote?  Gaye Symington has worked with each Deomcratic legislator her uncompromising support.  She has taken many, many political hits on their behalf.  What does it say about any Democrat who abandons her when she most needs her support?  Gaye Symington is the only Democrat who assumed the risk to run for governor this year.  If her party abandons her in a Legislative vote, then they were never worthy of her leadership and frankly, do not deserve one iota of support from her or her supporters any time in the future.

The Democratic party is different from the Republican party because we think more openly, consider more possibilities and make more concessions than our political opponents.  But now is not the time to concede.  We are also different from Republicans because far too often we are willing to shoot ourselves in the foot because in truth, we do not have the political courage and fortitude to make hard decisions.

It is time for the Vermont Democratic Party to toe the line and stand firm against the political talking heads and the two other major parties in their decision in January.  

Ian Carleton needs to begin this process now.  He needs to begin one-on-one meetings with every Democratic Representative and Senator.  He needs to put the pressure on, because if he has any job at VDP, this one is Job Number One.  He needs to secure vote pledges and he needs to demand vote transparency.  Every Democrat and every Vermonter needs to know how their Representatives and Senators voted.  

The only question -- the one and only question -- is, "Do Democrats have the spine to support Gaye Symington?"

So it's time to start calling on Ian Carleton and every Democratic across the state.  You can make this call yourself.

Just like the issue about Douglas' Free Ride, we can't wait until it's the 11th hour before we begin to drive this debate forward.  Call party members today.  And on November 5th, start writing letters to the editor; start making videos; and start doing YOUR best to support your candidate in January.  

The vote will still be yours to advocate for.  Its just a question of how hard you fight for it.  

Hold the party accountable.  Call today.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:35:22 AM UTC

I've said it before... (4.00 / 3)

...I'll say it again. If Pollina comes in second, I'll encourage legislators to vote for him.

But I want to see both of them pledge to back the #2 should they fall behind.

Although in honestly, Pollina has so stomped all over Dems for so long, I cant imagine a majority of them supporting him. The calls for unity are always so one-way, even with Symington involved - who went so far as to give a Progressive a committee leadership. Many of the Dems will have too much resentment to see past that, as they're only human.

But should it come to that, I'll do what I can. The legislature should elect the #2, unless they truly do come up in a virtual tie, and then - who the hell knows.

But I dont think they will. Pollina will finish third, although I may owe Van Deusen a beer since its more likely now that he will finish better than Con Hogan, percentage-wise.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:48:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree... (0.00 / 0)

I agree, Odum. I think he'll get the same percentage that Hogan got back in 2002 and I think the vote total for Douglas and Symington will be closer to 2002 then anything. Plus, I can name 10 Representative right now that are Dems that would never vote for Pollina. They would either take a walk or vote for Jimbo.

The real question is what will happen if Pollina does come in a third like he did in 2002 or a third that Hogan came in for 2002? Would he still contest the race in the Legislature even if he didn't have enough of the popular vote to legitimize his claim to the governorship?

I honestly don't know what's going to happen. It's great political theater though

---

by: Scott_C @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:46:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

new to VT (0.00 / 0)

... but are there really 10 Dem reps in the legislature that would pick Pollina over Does-less?  Why?

Pollina's run an unbelievably arrogant and stupid campaign, but if it means getting rid of Does-less, why wouldn't he get their votes?

---

by: Undamned Yankee @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 21:07:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Since GMD is a Democratic grassroots site, how do you feel about active support for the non-Democratic candidate posted here? (2.00 / 1)

We differ in our views about the Legislative decision, although I second your nod to Symington as the number two vote getter.

But humor me for a moment on the question of Robb Kidd's advocacy for Pollina only days before the vote, as well as ongoing advocacy against Symington?  

GMD is open to all, however it seems as if we also may be shooting the Democratic party candidate in the foot by allowing Progressive party activists to advocate against Symington and for Pollina.  In your opinion, is this appropriate?  

Just like the Bennington Banner, GMD can endorse a candidate.  This decision does not require a consensus decision among those who contribute to these pages.  It is the publisher's decision.

What do you think, John?  You're the publisher.  For my part, I feel compelled to challenge Robb Kidd and yet the Symington vs. Pollina debate will not further the cause for either candidate here.  

Should Progressive partisan activists wish to advocate for their candidate at this critical time in the election process, I believe GMD should assert its Democratic grassroots initiative and purpose.  GMD is open to advocates from the left, right and middle, yet there is a time and place for everything.

At this time and for this debate, I would suggest that advocacy for the non-Democratic candidate take place in other forums available to them.  There are plenty of political blogs online, and most are not consciously associated with any party.  

I believe front page, Kestrel9000, pointed out similar concerns during the SnarkyBoy days.

Thank you for your consideration.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 02:02:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I did, in fact. (2.20 / 5)

This is not dissimilar to a dustup regarding support for Ciondy sheehan on Daily Kos once she declared against Pelosi.
Now, I'm no fan of Naccy Pelosi, and I'm sure many here would agree.
Pelosi had a dem primary challenger, Shirley Golub, I think, was her name. Support for her was acceptable on dKos. Support for Cindy, as she is not a democrat, was not.
In my view, the same litmus applies to this site. GMD is dedicated to supporting and promoting Democratic Party candidates.
Absent a change to that mission statement, support for third/fourth/fifth party candidates who are running against Democrats should not be accepted here. This is a partisan blog.

Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 08:09:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bullshit. (3.40 / 5)

THere's a HUGE difference between writing a diary blatantly promoting Pollina and writing comments as such. Huge.

Robb and Rama have always more or less been in support of Pollina. Why all of a sudden is it a problem? Because the Dem candidate isn't faring much better? And I say this as someone who doesn't like either of them. Stop with the "good German" nonsense, folks.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:04:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And I would add... (0.00 / 0)

you can use those comments to bolster your own case for Symington. Although I don't think either one has a chance at this point, there really is no way in hell Pollina will win this thing, either outright or through the leg, so why get your panties in a bunch about it? And why didn't you complain when people were making comments like this 6 months ago?

What fun would it be if we all agreed? Not much.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:14:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Because there were still possibilities... (0.00 / 0)

...that Pollina could have run for Lt. Governor.

...that there was still an opportunity for a primary between the two candidates.

...because the electoral season was still relatively early.

...because the race wasn't anywhere near close.

...and because GMD is also an open forum almost all of the time.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:26:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Everybody's right, IMO (3.80 / 5)

Unlike other netroots Dem-oriented forums, we've always had a bigger tent here, in recognition of the odd dynamics of the state. It more or less works.

But its still a space designed to whip the Dems into shape, not destroy them. It's not a real free speech zone - its a blog with a specific function. Like any other such blog, there's an expectation that the space will remain conducive to that goal. If, for example, people wanted to take over "Bosox Wally's" site to talk about knitting, he'd be well within his rights to start restricting access. The free speech zone is the internet writ large, not everybody's individual websites. Duh. The only people who dont get that are traditionally classic trolls who reserve the "right" to wreck an established forum for everybody who is actually using it and scream "censorship" when the red carpet isnt rolled out for them (showing, more often than not, that they dont know what "censorship" or "free speech" actually mean).

If the atmosphere becomes such that its original purpose - whipping the Dems into shape by promoting progressive policies and candidates and cracking the whip when needed (and by extension, effecting the greater debate by impacting the media and allowing a forum for direct "virtual" action) - becomes unworkable, because people who share that goal feel drowned out, harassed or otherwise intimidated... then yeah - I'll go hardass and start laying down the law. This is not a news site. Its an agenda site. The people who are really about this community and who  share that same vision have a right to be able to use this tool without feeling like they have to expect a handful of people to call them idiots/sellouts/right-wingers/etc every time they poke their heads up. Again, if somebody doesn't like that - its a big internet. You can start your own blog for free by following this link. Finding an audience is your problem.

But as unpleasant as some of the holier-than-Dems set or the old fashioned Dem-bashers on the board can be, I think we're a long ways from that point. I'm not sweating it yet.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:50:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Odum, you are so wrong about... (0.00 / 0)

You really should change the "start your own blog" link to Wordpress.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:03:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

the rating system... (0.00 / 0)

...Seems to work very well.

There's a pretty entertaining thread in this discussion that has been hidden due to content a handful of people agreed to be objectionable.

It would be an improvement if one could rate a comment '2' for redundant, tangential, doesn't address the issue, or otherwise doesn't move the conversation.

---

by: Ivan Jacobs @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:11:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bring back the 2.... (0.00 / 0)

There's a lot of things that make me go "meh" but aren't exactly 1 or troll-worthy.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:16:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, exactly! "meh" is the word, err, sound? N/T (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Ivan Jacobs @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:23:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Once again, GMD is a Democratic grassroots forum. (3.00 / 1)

It's election time, JD, and this is a Democratic grassroots forum.  Even as a highly respected front pager, I think you can acknowledge the stated purpose of GMD is to focus on the Democratic Party orientation.

There is no distinction whatsoever in the stated purpose of GMD between diaries and comments.

While you are also clear that you are, "JD Ryan "That guy with the hair" is one of those not-Democrat front pagers odum warned you about," it's also true that, "There are rules. If you dont like them, you are encouraged to start your own blog. There are lots of free ones."

The purpose of rules of GMD do not make a distinction between diaries and comments.  It may be that your opinion differs from this, however the purpose of GMD has always been clear, including in multiple diaries and comments by the founder and co-founder of GMD.  The decision for many of progressive Democrats to align with the Democratic party has been acknowledged as both difficult and pragmatic.  The decision that progressive Democrats have made should be respected as much as the purpose of GMD.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:21:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fine. (4.00 / 1)

But my point is here, is people have been supporting Pollina in comments and even diaries since the election season started. All of a sudden it's a problem now? Bullshit. Who's gonna tune in to just read a bunch of people half-heartedly support Symington with no alternative viewpoints? We're a community, a discussion group. I didn't see anywhere where we're a propaganda outlet.

I'm well aware of the rules. If I wasn't, I don't think I'd have been able to be a FP'er for 2 years as well as represent GMD in Denver. I just don't like the squelching of reasonable dissent on here. I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors, and if it is indeed true that we're expanding our readership, why would we want all of a sudden limit the conversations on here unreasonably? One of the big themes we keep talking about is the big Dem/Prog rift, and the need for unity. Shutting up people who willingly come here to converse with us, who we in a sense agree with on most of the issues at least...how is that moving forward?

Do you honestly think having a discussion with a few Pollina supporters on here is hurting Symington? Believe me,that's the least of her problems right now. He's not going to win. Nada. Zip. No chance in hell. So why worry about it?

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:49:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A discussion with anyone, including Hierc, is fine. (3.00 / 1)

But discussion is different than unbending advocacy of a non-Democratic candidate.  We engage in discussion with folks from the right such as Hierc, Shesright (when she was around); folks from the center; folks from the business and finance community, libertarians, anarchists, cynics in addition to Progressive party members and advocates.  Those of us who identify as progressive Democrats can not be accused of spreading "propaganda" as party hacks in any way whatsoever.  Example?  See my comment about Peter Shumlin just two weeks ago:  http://www.greenmountaindaily....

Is that propaganda?  C'mon, JD.

Robb blatantly used this thread to promote Pollina at the expense of Symington, not Jim Douglas.  There's no propaganda in saying this is not acceptable at this point in time.

Misscurious, who's been troll-rated before and even rated a 1 by you back in September, is completely out of line with the Orwellian comparison and claim of censorship.  There's no Democratic propaganda here, either.

I agree with you that GMD is open to discussion as it always has been.  But the use of GMD to promote a non-Dem candidate at the expense of a Dem just days prior to the vote is what I would to refer to as bull.  Censorship?  Bull.  Trashing out Dems?  Bull.  Progressives never on a single occasion criticizing their own?  Bull.

There's a huge difference between discussion and propaganda, in that I agree with you, JD.  But if you look at the history of diaries and comments over the last two years, I think it's pretty clear that the absolutist, self-righteous propaganda does not belong to those who call themselves Democrats on GMD.  

How many times has a Prog acknowledged that another person might have a legitimate point of view?  How many times has misscurious and others who post comments such as hers come back and said, "Ok, I was a little out of line," JD.  

In this very thread I thanked Rama, a Pollina supporter, for his phone call to the MJ show.  Is that Democratic propaganda?

Look, progressive Democrats on GMD have been very open to discussions from a variety of viewpoints and pursuing the issues as a matter of respectful debate.  I think it's more than fair to tell Dem-bashing Progs to take it somewhere else one week before the vote.  

Does that make sense?

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 17:44:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Last thought. (4.00 / 2)

I appreciate what you have done over the last two years as well as every front pager and regular commentator who keeps the discussions and GMD respectful and vibrant through our differences of opinion.

And at the very least, I'd like to end my part in this diary on a good note.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 18:04:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're always a good sport, Nate... (4.00 / 2)

and it's greatly appreciated.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 19:02:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Downrated... (0.00 / 0)

...for "good german nonsense" nonsense. I tend to down rate anybody who brings in the nazis/Hitler experience to characterize somebody they disagree with. Screw Godwin's Law.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:31:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ok (4.00 / 1)

You got me on that one... perhaps "groupthink" might have been better. My bad.

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:39:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

4 for acknowledgment. (0.00 / 0)

We rarely see it in political leadership, so high respect from one who values acknowledgment and dismisses the notion that it makes one "look weak."  

For example, the attitude of "never apologize; never admit you are wrong," is the only explanation that Douglas is holding on to the asinine position that privatization of Social Security is a good thing.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:46:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If the mission statement of this blog has changed (3.00 / 3)

I must have missed the memo sent out to front pagers.
Don't give ME the "good German", shit, JD Godwin.
GMD is either a Democratic blog, or it is not.
Which is it?

Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:10:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey... (4.00 / 2)

I already gave my mea culpa on the 'good German" stuff when Odum called me on it.

It's a Democratic blog, not a Democratic propaganda outlet. That means reasonable dissent should be tolerated. Read odum's clarification comment up a few, I think he was pretty succinct.

You are always free to contradict the Pollina-ites instead of silencing them. What's easier? What's more constructive? And why didn't you say anything 6 months ago when people were posting like that? What's changed?

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 16:20:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perhaps aggressively spoken (0.00 / 0)

But it is a Dem focused blog. An uprate just to reinforce the point.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 12:00:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OOHHHH (0.00 / 0)

Never make a bet with Van Deusen- he comes to collect early and often....

"GMD's once proud libertarian-socialist"

---

by: wdh3 @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 02:45:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

47% (0.00 / 0)

47% is too close to 50 ..  my guess is that unless Douglas is under 45%, the Dems will fold.

---

by: Schrodinger's Cat @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:46:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

why the assumption about the Prog votes? (4.00 / 9)

Nate-

You indicate "You know damn Progressive legislators will only vote for Pollina".  I am sorry you say that. I have been very clear as have others in my caucus that if Douglas does not get 50% then we will vote to remove him.  We did not say...we will only vote for Pollina.  I have served with Gaye and have a lot of respect for her (as i have posted here before).  For me...it is which of the two comes in second and therefore is the majority winner withing the anti Douglas vote.

I appreciate that there are two groups of voters out there that should be recognized.  The middle of the road Dems/independents (that vote for Gaye, but would not want Pollina.  And the working class independent conservatives that vote for Pollina but would not want Gaye (and I know there are those of you who say there are only 6 of them.  I am not saying they amount to 6% or 10%, but they do exist).

So that is why both candidates together actually pose a better threat to Douglas than either of them alone. It is also the argument some would say, that I am making that Douglas should be reinstated if he is the top vote getter.

However...The argument that the D's have been making about Douglas is that he is the reason we are so far behind.  He is the reason we have not been able to get anything done.  I agree 95%.  Therefore...if we have a single vote that can remove the biggest obstacle...then we should do that.  We (D's primarily here) should have the courage in their own issue positions that if we can implement them over the next two years (whether Pollina or Symington) that the results of those policies will better the state and move us forward and the "backlash" will not exist.

I agree.  We do need to move forward together.  I think a lot more of the animosity is coming from a few hot heads (maybe on all sides), but that the reality is that we have worked together far better than the current dialogue suggests.

I also would posit that maybe we should have a post election gathering (I have been floating this amongst Chittenden County insiders who seem to like the idea) of two D's and 2 P's with a moderator to discuss both what has happened (last 10 years) and what can happen in the future?

Now...the reality is that we are separate party's and we have different philosophies on how to strategically get where there is much common ground. I do not think that is going to go away.  The question remains how to we both exist while also moving the discussion forward?  I think that we can and have done that on numerous occasions far more than the train wreck that you all are talking about throughout this thread.

Lastly...I would point out that Clavelle muscled his way into the D party on his own.  It was something that many many Progs were not supportive of just as there were many D's who were dissapointed.  But in the end many on both sides held their grudges and worked for him.  There were problems in the campaign (as there are in the Symington campaign) with messaging etc.  But I want to make sure the record is straight that it was not a Prog takeover as mentioned elsewhere in this thread.

It is too easy to get heated. I think we all need to focus our energy on bringing Douglas down as far as we can on the next week.  Hopefully turnout will help.  If he is at 48% then I agree...the gig is over.  But if we can get him to 45% or even 43 or 42% then I think the full doors are open and it will be a matter of the 180 Reps and Senators to get it together to put either Gaye or Anthony (in part depending on their results) into the Governors office.

Either one will work with the Legislature.  Gaye will certainly have more inroads. But Anthony knows there are many D's who have similar positions on many issues to him and he has worked with legislators many many times in the past in various roles.  It is not a new game to him.  

THey each have their strengths and weaknesses.  But we should be focussing on removing Douglas...not all this bickering that is going on here.

---

by: David Zuckerman @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 20:12:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yup (0.00 / 0)

I like what I am hearing from Dave, here, so thanks Dave for at least coming on and saying what you think about the race. I also like the idea of having some kind of forum so Dems and Progs can actively talk about their differences and common understandings.

And he is right on...If the Gov is not below 45 percent then I don't think there is a point to challenging it in the Legislature. Too close to 50 for my taste. Don't know how you feel Dave about going against the popular vote and save Vermonters from themselves. I'd trust your judgment, hands down.

I think we are getting a little bent out of shape over this. I personally think that at the end of the night, Douglas will be close to 44-46 percent of the vote. Depending on where Gaye is on the map and where Pollina is, there will have to be conversations on what we can do. Would Pollina try to take his fight to the Legislature? Dave, your thoughts? Would Pollina back out and endorse Gaye if she got substantially more votes than him and was within striking distance? I personally don't know if Gaye would back out and endorse Pollina if he came in second (which I highly doubt he will).

Unless it is close, I don't see the point of a legislative fight that could cause a lot of long term problems later on down the road. I personally think deals will be struck, arms will be twisted and Douglas will spend his final term in office before calling it quits.

However, I don't think Pollina will work well with the Legislature, especially the Senate and the Dem leadership in the House. Too many bad memories from '02 and this year. I mean, Symington has been focusing all of her attention on Douglas. Pollina, in every debate I have gone to, has attacked both of them. I just think there are too many Democratic legislators that will simply not forget that.

My prediction for the race is simple:

Douglas in the mid to low 40s, Symington in the mid to high 30s and Pollina in the teens.

Between those numbers is where I see the race going. Repeat of the '02 Lt. Gov Race.

---

by: Scott_C @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 04:09:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

To tired to think properly (4.00 / 3)

In the midst of the chaos of campaigning and farming and parenting I may not make much sense with a 6 AM posting...but I will do my best.

Ultimately and technically if Douglas is at 49.9% or even exactly 50% (50%+1 is needed to win), then we have the authority to do what we want to.

But I do think that it will have to be determined by the outcome on the 4th.  Too many variables.  The first one being the numbers that each of the three of them get. The second being the make-up of the newly elected Gen. Assembly (I am hearing from some that they think the R's might lose another 3-5 seats). Those two are the numbers issues.

Then there will be the political ones.  How will Douglas, Symington and Pollina react to the votes and to each other?  Six years ago, it was Racine and Shumlin who both pushed for "top vote getter" as well as urged unity and move on after the election.  I think that folks are better prepared for different answers now, but I am not in Symingtons inner camp, nor have I talked with Ian or Jill or anyone else over there about "the plan".  With respect to Anthony, I have not spoken to him about this in many months as well because of the campaigning that each of us has been doing.  But I think this discussion reminds me that we must to have this discussion before Tuesday because the question will be raised immediately.  I am sure that Anthony has thought about it.  Considering he has campaigned all along on the idea of getting rid of Douglas then I am pretty sure he will work with anyone to help make that happen.  But that is conjecture on my part.

I know that there will be hard feelings after the election...I have some myself.  But the reality is that most of the folks I have known in Montpelier get right down to work after the election and most are able to move on from campaign rhetoric to strategic thinking.

I think the predictions on this race are impossible to make.  I respect that folks are throwing numbers out there.  But with the recent polling who knows?  On the one hand it could fire up Symington supporters to do more and she could come roaring back.  Or, people on the fence might say...momentum is with Anthony, lets get him closer?  I do not know.  I am not sure any of us do.

I think it is obvious that if Gaye comes in second that she could easily be elected Governor if there is the backbone to do it.  If Anthony gets second it puts the D's in a much more akward position.  But I also know many D's who were strongly considering supporting Anthony before Gaye got in the race.  I also know some who actually were.  Whether this race has made D's more or less confident in Gaye or more interested or angry at Anthony I do not know.  Those conversations have not happened yet.

As far as building bridges, I will do what I can (if re-elected) in as many conversations as soon as possible.  I wish I had more time now...but I do not.  But I will be clear, the ultimate decision will be the Democratic caucus.  They (you) hold the reigns.  If we do not want 2 more years of the roadblock then we will have the power to remove it.  The ultimate decision will be up to them.  The goal is always to get the majority to do good things...

This will be one of those opportunities.

---

by: David Zuckerman @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 09:47:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah... (0.00 / 0)

Do whatever Dave just wrote.

I actually agree with Dave completely. I trust the Dems and the Progs to make the right call on this one so something does need to happen. I'm sure Gaye's people have already discussed the issue.

I was writing my thesis for my Political Leadership class at UVM this Spring and it was about women in politics in Vermont. Really interesting stuff for political junkies. I sat down a couple times with Kate O'Connor and she told me that the goal of Ruth Dwyer's people back in 2000 was really to get Dean below 50 percent and let the Legislature decide. However, things changed when Dwyer suddenly conceded the race.

I'm sure provisions have already been made in the Symington and Douglas campaigns for a legislative brawl. Progs? Not sure.

But yeah, Dave is right on the money here.

And like Dave, I'm fried as well. I've been making phone calls all week reminding people to mail their damn ballots back in local House races and the numbers that Dave brought up of R's losing seat is actually what I am seeing on the ground right now especially in David Ainsworth's District, Joyce Erakheart and down in Vergennes.

Things are looking OK in terms of expanding the majority with the Progs in the House but Dems can still lose seats up in St. Albans thanks to Fitzgerald and Allard.

---

by: Scott_C @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 19:04:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Post your thesis here when you're done, Scott. (0.00 / 0)

Unless you have a book publishing gig line up.  :)

Seriously, it sounds like a good read and after all, why not?

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 23:28:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

embarrassing typo. (4.00 / 1)

"you know damn Progressives..." was intended to say, "you know damn well Progressives..."

My apology for that.  Whew.  

Good, thoughtful response, David.  Thanks.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 04:15:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Still lots of work to be done! (4.00 / 2)

"Pollina supporters, on the other hand, are often just as passionate (sometimes more so) about beating Democrats as Republicans."

From the very beginning is has been plainly obvious to see they Symington was going to concentrate on going after Douglas. Her focus on that has been very well executed.

Pollina on the other hand, HAD to go after Symington and has, many, many times. Don't get me wrong; he has gone after Douglas also, but rarely without lumping Douglas and Symington together.

I propose this theory: if Douglas had spent as much money attacking Pollina, and both Douglas and Symington spent time attacking Pollina, his numbers would be much, much worse. His rise in poll numbers only comes from Douglas removing support from Symington.

My point is, I proposed way back at the beginning that a 3-way race would only work if Symington AND Pollina kept their undivided focus on Douglas. Only one of the candidates has followed the simple logic of NOT dividing the anti-Douglas vote and attempting to create MORE anti-Douglas voters.

But alas the past cannot be undone... So what is next?

1) STOP competing for anti-Douglas votes
2) Concentrate on creating MORE anti-Douglas votes even at this late stage
3) Start the narrative of post-election right now to have the upper hand on framing the message
4) Find out how your local House and Senate candidate would vote for Governor no matter what the final vote totals are, assuming Douglas is below 50% (the end game is to make sure they are at least open to the idea of not voting for Douglas)

I think everyone can agree that if the majority of Vermonters vote to change the Governor of Vermont; then Jim Douglas should be looking for new work just like a record number of regular Vermonters are currently doing.  

---

by: AQ @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 00:59:44 AM UTC

Close split = Douglas win (4.00 / 1)

It makes perfect sense in this situation for Douglas to go heavily negative on Symington.

He doesn't have to gain votes for himself, just push votes away from Symington.  Pollina functions, effectively, as a "sponge" candidate.

If it comes out 45-30-25, Douglas wins.  There is no way the legislature can hand it to anyone who is 15-20 points back.  Even if they do, I believe the new governor will be so politically crippled as to guarantee a single term, and probably a bloodbath in the 2010 legislative races.

---

by: CarbonCopy @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:24:14 AM UTC

Join Up an rally with Pollina (0.00 / 0)

More of the same, it's time to join up in the attack on Douglas. Pollina had tried to unite the Democracts, but it appears that the leadership wanted nothing to do with it. Although, time has passed it is not too late for you as Independent thinkers to take into account the reasons to vote for Pollina.

So if you want to remove Douglass and vote for progressive change here are some reasons to:

Pollina has a higher pro-rating than Symington and has expressed clear and articulate ideas on why we should elect him. Instead of rehashing the tired rhetoric of electability you should go and look for your self and see what Anthony speaks for,listen to one of the debates, or find Pollina at an event and talk to him yourself.(Pollina will talk with you and not at you.)

In case you don't here are some other reasons to support Pollina:
Many of you praise Obama for his community organizing experience, so why not praise Pollina for the same. Many of you praise Obama for inspiring change, why not Pollina for he is clearly change. Many of you praise Obama for his nuclear stand(oops) I mean don't, but you should Pollina for he is clearly anti.  The issues go on and on, but I am not writing a diary here. But look for yourself.

In case that fails here is a quote that should remind you of  progressive movements.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."-Gandhi

---

by: RobbKidd @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:36:26 AM UTC

Reality Check Here, Folks (4.00 / 2)

Robb,

I'm a realist and so are a lot of people on this site. We all know that if Pollina was elected by the Leg (which would never happen), he would never be taken seriously by the Legislature. Period.

The new Speaker and the Senate President would have a field day with Pollina. They would essentially ignore him and not include him on any discussions. This is the handicap that Pollina has: He's never held political office. He doesn't know his way around the Capitol like Gaye, Shumlin and whoever the new Speaker is.

So, let's get real here. Pollina will NEVER be elected by the Legislature. They just will not do it. There are too many people that remember 2002 and what happened in that race. There are too many people who are loyal to Gaye. And...there are just too many people who simply do not like the guy.

Now, I don't mind him. I actually like a lot of his ideas...but at this point, I see Douglas holding firm between 8-10 percentage points and with Gaye and Pollina dividing up the rest of the vote. Douglas will get re-elected by the Legislature because what was said earlier, there will be a blood bath in the legislative races and the Governor would only be one one term, if the Legislature went against the general electorate's wishes when the winner of the popular vote led by such a large margin.

Granted, this is all speculation but we have to come back to reality. I knew Pollina would gain traction in this poll and I knew that this race would be close. More importantly, I know that Pollina will not be sworn-in as Governor in January. It's either Douglas or Symington at this point just because they have the resources to wage a legislative fight.

I would really be interested to hear what Odum and company felt of what would happen in a Legislative fight between Pollina and Douglas?  

---

by: Scott_C @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:58:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm with you except on prognostication (4.00 / 1)

Well said.  Here's my exception:

Douglas will get re-elected by the Legislature because what was said earlier

1.  Not sure what you were referencing here.  Is this a GMD reference?  Where ever it came from, this is a self-fulfilling prophesy (not yours, but your reference's).  Sure, it's true if Legislators listen to GMDers or Mark Johnson instead of using their Constitutional right to make their own decision.

there will be a blood bath in the legislative races

2.  Memory is short.  Legislators won't be up for re-election until 2010.  Only really hardcore partisans will hold the grudge.  Two years allows a lot of healing time.

and the Governor would only be one one term...

3.  Same as above, but with these additions:  

    a.  If Gaye is successful in providing Vermonters with what they need during a deep recession, then she will have proven her leadership and earn a second term.  

    b.  There are no Republican candidates in the wings except Brian Dubie, who will all but disappear if Douglas loses.  However, Dubie won't likely have a Washington job opportunity in an Obama Administration, so he might use his post to campaign for 18 months.  Then he'll be fair game for criticism.  I can't imagine he has the political fortitude to last long being called out on the carpet on a regular basis.

    c.  A Democratic primary?  Only an ass would run against Symington.  Yes, "ass" is a specific reference.

    d.  In the worst case scenario, a one-term Symington Administration during the worst economic crisis since the Depression would be far better than another two years of Douglas.  To be hones, I'm scared for Vermont businesses and middle-income earners if we have to survive on our own.

This last point is yet another argument that Democratic legislators can make to constituents for a Symington vote in January.  Everyone should be afraid about their job, their income, heating their homes and buying food for the next two, three and maybe even five years.  Can Democratic legislators honestly look themselves in the mirror and vote for Jim Douglas with this in mind?  If we weren't in such an unfortunate historic moment in the US economy, then the case for a plurality vote is strong.  But right now there's simply too much is at stake for working Vermonters.  Douglas' role to "hold the Legislature back," will be a huge mistake since we will more likely need fast action on many different issues over the next two years.


Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 02:34:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Divider, not a uniter (4.00 / 2)

Pollina had tried to unite the Democracts...

Puhleeze!  If you really think Pollina made a serious effort to get the support of the institutional party at any point in this campaign, I've got a (Douglas-and-Lunderville maintained) bridge to sell you!  Alternatively, he's even less competent to handle the nitty-gritty politics of actually governing than  I thought.

Sow some division in the ranks and try to bluff a Dem candidate out of the race?  Sure.  Serious outreach or discussion?  Not in any recognizable form.

---

by: CarbonCopy @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:52:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Correct me... (0.00 / 0)

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't he drive Vermont Milk Company into the ground and was then forced out? Could someone clarify that for me?

If he can't manage a business like that...I don't trust him with my tax dollars.

---

by: Scott_C @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:13:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Okay then ... (0.00 / 0)

where's the evidence that Pollina drove Vermont Milk Company into the ground? Or even forced out for that matter.


It's over at http://ramabahama.net ... only it's still under construction (but so is the rest of my life)

---

by: Rama Schneider @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:50:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

you keep saying this (3.20 / 5)

but I don't buy it

"Pollina supporters, on the other hand, are often just as passionate (sometimes more so) about beating Democrats as Republicans."

Often? Exactly how many Pollina supporters have you spoken to? I'm a Pollina supporter and I have never -- EVER - felt or expressed passion about "beating" Democrats.

I know an awful lot of Pollina supporters. Their goal is to defeat Jim Douglas and get this state moving again. With very few exceptions, they like and respect Gaye Symington; as I do.  

Your personal animosity toward Anthony is your own affair. But I just don't understand why you keep fanning the flames. You call for cooperation but persist in trashing Progs. How is that different from what you claim is their raison d'etre?

We have a common enemy. Let's stay focused.  

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 01:43:27 AM UTC

Blah, blah, blah. (3.00 / 4)

"Shut up. You suck. Get with our program."

Followed immediately by:

"Let's not fight!"

A-yup. Are you trying to make my point for me, or am I just lucky?

As to how many Pollina supporters have I spoken to? In the last couple months? About this stuff? Dozens. Want a nice example, scroll up and read Mr. Kidd's posts above. He makes his absolute abhorrence of Symington and all things Democrat plain to me both on and offline virtually every chance. And although he's an extreme example, I encounter others with slightly more tempered versions of the same feelings all the time. Part of how I know is that they frequently assume I agree with them.

And historically? I worked for Bernie Sanders one election. Those "dozens" multiply quite a bit when you factor in that experience. Or my experience in the County with Progressive Coalition activists after that. At this point, we're well into three figures.

Why don't you tell me what you consider the critical number is to be able to be considered worthy to have an opinion by you? Dying to know.

Of course what would be revolutionary is if you and your social group were willing to even attempt to do what we do here - that is, look at the weaknesses and failures of our own "team" square in the eye and take them on. Honestly. Humbly. Openly.

Fat chance of that happening.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 02:06:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I vote FOR somebody/something ... not against (0.00 / 0)

one exception with your post though, Doug.

Douglas isn't an enemy ... he has as much right to fight for his ideas (poor or otherwise) as you or I do.

It's over at http://ramabahama.net ... only it's still under construction (but so is the rest of my life)

---

by: Rama Schneider @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:55:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, that's wher I differ. (4.00 / 3)

Considering that NO progress will happen unitil the right wing is completely crushed, voting AGAINST Republicans still takes priority for me over anything else.  

You can read JD's latest at five before chaos. Politics. Godlessness. Music. Films of questionable quality. It's all there, folks.

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:08:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So what makes THIS poll a "real" one? (0.00 / 0)

We needed a real poll

As opposed to those others that aren't "real"?


It's over at http://ramabahama.net ... only it's still under construction (but so is the rest of my life)

---

by: Rama Schneider @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 11:07:28 AM UTC

Assumption (4.00 / 2)

All,

We seem to be  assuming that the Prog candidate would be preferable to Dems over a Rep candidate.  Not sure that is a safe assumption.  I think there are a lot of center-left Dems who would rather hold their nose with another Douglas term than have a Gov Pollina.  

Personally, I'd have to think long and hard about whether we can endure 2 more years of Do-Less or take a risk with Pollina who combines goofy ideas with no experience in elected office.  In normal times, I might be willing to support Pollina on the assumption that he will prove a disaster, making it easier for a Dem in '10.  However, we are not living in normal times.   The devil we know may be preferable to the devil we don't.

Not sure how I come out on this and I suspect there may be others who have similar concerns.

---

by: SPS @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 11:15:05 AM UTC

I'm more to the left than you... (4.00 / 1)

...more to the left than a lot of Pollina supporters, I'd wager - so its no contest from my perspective. I have a lot of concerns, obviously, but he'd have to learn how to govern. Build bridges rather than burn them, and without enough of a bench and a legislative infrastructure to go it alone, he'd have to depend on Democrats. The 2-party dynamics would set in, and the Progs and the Dems would essentially merge by necessity.

If he actively fought against that, he would guarantee a re-election loss, as in a head to head against a popular Republican (and they'd be falling over themselves to run against him) he'd get his ass kicked if many Dems made the decision that a moderate Repub would have a place at the table for them where Pollina wouldn't (if he didn't - which is my point... he'd have to).

In a Machiavellian way, it was in my calculus early on before the whole potential Racine candidacy fiasco/letdown (which is where I got mad) when I was trying to game out what a Pollina candidacy with Democratic support could look like if it was going to work and talking with folks like Dave Zuckerman and John Burgess via email about it.

But its likely moot. Its hard to imagine the legislature handing the election to anybody unless they can close that gap to 10 points or less - and the #3 would HAVE to swallow their pride and give the #2 support and cover.

As for wacky ideas... well, a rewards card would be DOA unless it was one part of a bigger package, which seems fine. Whatever.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 12:36:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah... (0.00 / 0)

My mother and my entire family (myself excepted) being those centrist Dems all would vote for Douglas

In my family, IRV would go like this:

1. Symington
2. Douglas
3. Somebody Else Besides Pollina

A lot of centrist Dems that supported Pete Shumlin back in '02 are in that camp.

---

by: Scott_C @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:14:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stop the bickering (0.00 / 0)

We can bicker back and forth over who should be governor of VT. Gaye is highly qualified and a huge policy wonk, yet she may not shine during debates (it is hard to describe your energy policy in 90 seconds). And Anthony has no experience in elected office and may have burned a few bridges in his rise to power, but he can orate.

Whomever you support, we need to unite on this one issue: we want Douglas out. In order to do that we need to keep him below 50%.

How do we do that? (Great question)
1) stop the attacks against dem v prog/independent
2) start focusing your attacks against Douglas
  -Link him to Bush/McCain
  -Link him to ignoring what is right for VT
  -Link him to poor policy
  -Link him to crumbling roads, no energy policy
  -Link him to using tax payers $ to fund his campaign
3) Get out the Vote for your candidate
4) Talk to your reps and tell them whom you support

Lastly, cross your fingers and let's hope that Douglas gets kicked out!

---

by: qwerty @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 13:43:43 PM UTC

Love the username, btw n/t (0.00 / 0)

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 13:49:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't forget Clavelle... (4.00 / 1)

This is a post I left a couple days ago as a late addition to an open thread that is very relevant to this discussion.

On Friday, Anthony came to speak to a group of residents at the place where I work. I listened to his entire speech along with 30 or so other people. At one point during his 70 minute lecture (yeah, lecture) he introduced the "25% + 25% = 50% and I win" theory. After he was finished with the residents questions, I intoduced myself to him. I asked him if he'd ever read GMD. He said that although he's familiar with Odum that he doesn't read Blogs and that as a politician it was unwise for him to do so. I mentioned that he should make an exception as there is a post with a very valid point about his math not working out as he'd like it to. If every person that voted for him in the last election brought along a friend and the election saw a higher turnout of say, 10%, that he's advertising a losing strategy. He admitted that even though he's aware that the math could be "funny", it's still a way for people to conceptualize a path to his victory. So, in essence he said "I know it's not accurate, but I'll continue to pitch it because it works". Sweet.
The residents who came to hear him seemed split upon leaving. Those who had strong opinions of him and sponsored his attendance seemed about as fired up as 80 something year olds could be after enduring a high fiber lunch and a political lecture. Many others however, left scratching their heads on the way out trying to figure out how two left wing candidates running in a three way race could hope to unseat a moderate center-right incumbent governor. Pollina tried to assure them that it could be done. I suspect he knows it's not true, but that he'll continue to pitch it because it works. Not toward his goal of becoming the governor of the state of Vermont but to be the second highest vote getter on November 4, ahead of Gaye Symington, to stave off the end of his political career. In baseball it's one, two, three strikes you're out of the old ballgame. Maybe Tony considers a second place finish in this race a foul ball which would leave him at the plate waiting for another pitch.

Additionally, doesn't anyone remember the last gubernatorial campaign in which the Democrats capitulated to the Progressives and ran Peter Clavelle against Jim Douglas? How'd that work out for all of us?

---

by: farjas @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 13:53:10 PM UTC

At the risk of being obtuse (4.00 / 1)

isn't there really only one way to read this? Even with Pollina and Symington battling each other, we still have roughly half the electorate that would like to turn the page on Douglas. Imagine if we had a unified candidacy--i.e., a single party that combined the P and D flavors, and allowed those of us who are not strongly biased towards either flavor to actually get out and campaign enthusiastically with some hope of victory. I think Douglas would be history. And we would not need to go through the politically painful mathematics of trying to figure out how we'd justify the legislature electing one or the other when they're way behind JD. To me, this argues for everyone coming together later this year and trying to broker that new party into existence, or else get used to a governor-for-life.

But then, I'm in the Atlanta airport and got up at 3:45 this a.m. so I'm probably not thinking too straight.  

---

by: bill mckibben @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:09:43 PM UTC

IRV (4.00 / 1)

Bill,
I don't know if you caught the discussion when you pitched the unity party idea last time, but my question for you remains: Why not fight like hell for IRV?
Seems like a straight-forward way to deal with the issue of people getting elected without majority support, It'd also be a hell of a lot easier to do than trying to unite the left.
P.S.
Looking forward to the localism debate at UVM this afternoon.

---

by: Ivan Jacobs @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 14:33:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, a very good idea (0.00 / 0)

that i have fought for repeatedly (opeds in the free press and the times argus, etc). But it requires the signature of the governor, which gets us back to wash, rinse, repeat.

---

by: bill mckibben @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 18:24:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Kudos and Thank you to Rama and Jack. (4.00 / 1)

Rama, I want to extend my personal, political and public appreciation of your call-in to the Mark Johnson show this morning during the Symington interview.  Your clear argument for IRV was succinct, on point and a significant statement against a legislative vote for Jim Douglas.

I would also to thank Jack for successfully getting his "My Turn" op-ed piece published in the Burlington Free Press today.  

A fine effort and example from both of you.  Once again, thank you and a hearty, "Job well done."

In follow up I would like to mention once again to GMD readers and contributors that the most effective way to overturn the Douglas Administration is to bring the debate to the mainstream media through talk-show call-ins, talking to friends and, between Nov. 4th and a January vote in legislature, letters to the editor and op-ed editorials.

GMD is honored to have a significant and growing audience compared to many other online political forums.  However, the majority of independent-voting Vermonters rely on the mainstream media to learn about the candidates.  Our efforts to deliver viewpoints and information available on GMD to the mainstream audience should be considered another purpose for this forum as we work to reintroduce traditional Vermont values of progress and hard work to the public sector.

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 15:06:04 PM UTC