I was disappointed to read that the Governor’s reelection campaign has nixed any and all debates apart from those hosted by media outlets.

Most specifically, I am disappointed that there will be no debate hosted by Toxics Action Center, the VNRC and the rest of the environmental community, who came together in November 2009 to launch the Democratic gubernatorial debates with an extremely friendly forum at their annual “Environmental Action”event in Randolph.

Governor Shumlin should remember that forum well.  He rocked the room with fiery promises, and received thunderous applause for most of his comments.  

Set aside for a moment the fact that this particularly warm reception was bolstered by his campaign posse, who were liberally peppered throughout the audience and conspicuously exited at the end of the debate without staying for any of the closing remarks from the groups who sponsored the forum.  This was the signature event that opened his stellar primary run.

Many of the same people who attended that first forum were present a year later, in November 2010, at the same annual event to hear the new Governor-elect address his environmental supporters in a recorded speech, reiterating his commitment to their shared values.  Despite what had turned out to be a bitterly fought primary race and close election, or perhaps because of it, the Governor’s response from this core constituency could not have been warmer.

Governor Shumlin might be feeling a little uncertain about his reception this time by the environmental community; especially so, in light of his stream-bed reclamation decisions, post-Irene.  This would be his opportunity to square himself with a key-constituency by recognizing their importance to his authority, and by making himself available for questioning.  The environmental community is, for the most part, a sympathetic audience, which stands ready to give a fair hearing to his rationale.  

He can’t possibly think himself more vulnerable than Randy Brock on environmental issues!

The AARP represents another front on which he might seize the opportunity of a debate to take control of the message.  He certainly has the healthcare chops to win a more focussed hearing from the AARP crowd for his rationale in opposing the CVPS payback that AARP (and Randy Brock) supported.  But I can well-understand that this is not necessarily a venue that is to his distinct advantage.

The environmental lobby is very definitely a venue where he needs to do some serious fence mending, and where there is no risk of being bested by Brock.  

It’s a snub that could well come back to bite him sometime in the future.

Nice little fluff piece on VTDigger about Vermont Republicans at the national convention. Jack Lindley bragging about screwing over the Ron Paul delegation (he’s hated them since they prevented Mitt from bagging a majority of the Vermont primary vote), Randy Brock working the hallways trying to pump some money into his rapidly-emptying warchest, and an intriguing little item about the difference between the state and national GOP.

You may recall this little convention-preview tidbit from the Freeploid:

You might wonder if [Randy] Brock is worried about how spending time at the Republican National Convention will go over with voters back home where the national Republican scene – including the rise to the prominence of tea party groups – gives some Vermonters the heebee jeebies.

Brock shrugged that off, suggesting he could be a good influence on the national party. “The best way to insure that their side prevails is not to participate,” he said. “I need to be part of that debate.”

At the time, I posed the question, exactly how does “their side” (the tea partiers) differ from Randy Brock’s allegedly kinder, gentler side? Well, here’s the answer, courtesy of one Craig Bensen, radical fundamentalist minister who’s still trying to overturn marriage equality AND who was the chair of the Vermont delegation to the national convention.

My view is that the two platforms are pretty much consistent. The national platform has a lot more pages and specifics, but the broad brush strokes are very similar.

But hey, don’t worry about it, Vermont moderates! The platform is so meaningless, it might as well be written on toilet paper. So says Randy Brock:  

Although the platform represents official party positions nationally, Brock argued that it isn’t really that significant as a political document, especially for the average Vermonter.

“It represents the position in some cases of those so-called ‘base activists’, not really relevant to those of us here in Vermont,” said Brock, who added that Vermont Republicans have been an “independent breed” and a moderating influence on a more right-wing national party platform. “But some underlying issues in the platform, particularly the size and role of government, and the need to revitalize our economy, are things we’re in closer alignment on.”

Profiles in Courage. Brock admits that the VTGOP stands with the national party on financial and budgetary issues, regulation, taxation, and giving the One Percent even more leeway to do what they want. (Hey, that’s the national GOP’s entire economic program, right?)

As for what makes Vermont Republicans an “independent breed,” not a clue. You might assume that the VTGOP is less stringent on social issues… but Randy doesn’t say so. And the party did choose Craig Bensen to lead their delegation — a significant honorific for a fringe character whose focus is entirely on social issues.

And about Randy’s claim that the VTGOP is a “moderating influence,” well, the available evidence suggests that the VTGOP has about as much influence as a fart in a windstorm.

And I’m still waiting to find out how the VTGOP differs from the national party.