Consider: Anthony Pollina’s fortunes improved after the much-maligned decision to drop the “Progressive” label and run as an Independent. A move I suggested at the time was a good notion in principle, but was ill-timed. Now it’s no doubt the major reason for Pollina’s inching into the 20’s was Symington’s collapse, but I suspect the Independent label did indeed give him a boost after all.

Consider also: Progressive Burlington City Councilor Tim Ashe opted to run in the Democratic primary, got nominated, and as a result has apparently been elected over Denise Barnard.

Question: Are the Progressives ultimately destined to be more successful if they go back to being a movement (a la the old “Progressive Coalitions” that – gasp – even included people like me), rather than a Party?

After all, the solid showing of Pollina and the success of Ashe comes in contrast to the first decrease in the Progressive Party caucus in the Statehouse.

More evidence: Montpelier election results are always useful as a gauge of much of the left in the state, given the city’s dynamics. In Montpelier, Symington came in third place to Pollina and Douglas respectively. Progressive surge?

Then how to explain the Justice of the Peace races? Montpelier’s 15 slots were filled up first and foremost with the 13 Democrats who appeared on the ballot. The bottom two vote getters to pass the threshold to victory were two Progressives voted in from their slate of 11. This means that – despite the showing of Pollina – Progressives at this most grassroots level only picked up those two seats that there weren’t enough Dems to fill. This despite the fact that the Progressive JP ballot in the town was filled with high-profile A listers such as Ellen David and Stuart Friedman, Marj Power and former State Representative Steve Hingtgen – none of whom made the final cut.

Mixed signals? Contradictions?

Only if you’d rather not confront the message being delivered head on, as it contains harsh realities for both Democrats and Progressives.

So, what do you think – is it time to bring back the Progressive Coalitions?

(Since this seems to be the most relevant diary right now, I’m bumping it up to the top. – promoted by JulieWaters)

A lot of lefties are waking up this morning feeling all dressed up with nowhere to go, as there will be no legislative showdown for the Governorship after all. Here are the numbers so far via WCAX:

Douglas, Jim 149314 54.4%

Pollina, Anthony 58984 21.5%

Symington, Gaye 58308 21.3%

It’s fairly self-evident that bragging rights for the second place slot were going to be significant, but as it stands so far, Pollina and Symington have virtually the same vote count, with only 676 votes (or .2 percent) separating them. If these votes hold (and they will change somewhat) it’s interesting to compare these results to Pollina’s results in 2002, where he came in third to Dubie and Shumlin with 56564 votes or 24.8%, meaning he increased his vote by 2420 votes or 4.3 percent, which will likely not be near the increase in actual turnout. The mind boggles at what the numbers might have been if they had run someone like Zuckerman who didn’t come with the kind of polarizing baggage that will clearly continue to hardwire Pollina from ever achieving the top spot (Zuckerman, by the way, was the top vote getter in his own district, but will be joined in the statehouse by Democrat Kesha Ram who handily defeated incumbent Progressive Chris Pearson).

So although I do have a nasty stomach bug, I can’t help but wonder if what was really making me nauseous was watching the return of much-loved Chris Graff to the pundit-waves. Graff waxed all squooshy about how the “big story” of the election was his pal Jim Douglas, who’d managed to rise above the partisanship and unite Vermonters under his banner.

Graff, of course, is an old Middlebury pal of Douglas’s, and as the dean of the Vermont Press Corps, always set the tone among the fourth estate that allowed Douglas to get off the hook for everything. He was clearly making up for lost time here.

Because the big story of the night was obviously the unprecedented collapse of the Symington effort. Symington, whose unfavorables tripled from 15% to 45% in a month, leaving Pollina to pick up about three quarters of the fallout, and Douglas with the other quarter, pushing him over the top. Vermont, with its small population, has always had the potential to turn on a dime like this, but we’ve never seen it happen in my memory.

Why did it happen? Lots of reasons. Pollina’s challenge of the campaign finance law didn’t hurt him, and for the rest of the campaign he didn’t screw up, allowing him (and Douglas) to be beneficiaries of the collapse. Douglas’s negative attacks were obviously effective, but they were enabled by Symington’s bungling of the personal finances matter. Symington also ran a classic Democratic campaign – that is, she wasn’t chewing gum and walking at the same time. She spent a lot of time hammering Douglas, which we all wanted to see, but largely let up on trying to define herself right when the Douglas and Pollina defining of her began. Bad timing.

And there were lots of mysteries about the Symington campaign. WHy on Earth was there zero Symington visibility at the Montpelier polling place at 7:30 AM Election Morning? Somehow I doubt that was an isolated incident.

One thing for sure, if Pollina does what he’s reportedly talking about doing – announce his 2010 run this week – we’re all screwed. There is no way to look at these numbers and feel buoyed for yet another run, unless he and his supporters are simply fixated on the triumph of beating the Dem and aren’t looking clear-headedly at the overall numbers. Of course, we’ve had Progressive stalwarts on this website insisting that the very notion of such disproportionate glee is poppycock. I guess we’ll know more over the next few days.

There is much, much more to discuss (including some major concerns over the Democratic Party Coordinated Campaign this time around, and the damage that may have been inflicted on future election cycles), but let’s start with this.

This looks like it, folks

Seems a lot of the traditional media sites are downright giddy about all their widgets and Johnny-on-the-scene election goodness – and more power to ’em, as it makes doing this lowly blogging that much easier.

At GMD, we’re going to sit back and do the community thing – that is, depend on you folks out and about to give us the what for on an election open thread (which I’ll keep bumping to the top while we all doubtless generate “breaking” diaries. I hope to be posting the now-traditional Spongebob victory dance at least once). Post your updates in the results thread and I’ll try to keep the sidebar list updated, while the widgetry of MSNBC should keep us all in the know at the Presidential/National level throughout the night.

Settle in. Here we go.

UPDATE 7:30: First results on the sidebar. WCAX reports that exit polls suggest Pollina in second place by a large margin. Douglas very near 50%.

UPDATE 8:00 Results from Montpelier – Pollina takes 1st, Symington comes in 3rd behind him and Douglas.

UPDATE 8:45 Interesting Bennington numbers via vtbuzz: Douglas: 3195, Symington: 2422, Pollina: 708. Looking very likely that Douglas will break the 50% mark outright.

MY FINAL UPDATE: Okay, maybe I invited a curse by not going to an Election Eve Party for the first time in about 16 years, but I am sick as a dog with a stomach bug that hit me outta nowhere. That means there wont be many updates on the right, and analysis of the news (including what looks to be the unprecedented repudiation of the Symington campaign) is up to you all…. but I’ll have plenty to say tomorrow, including a electoral anecdotes…. have fun!)

Yes, I’ve seen the polls. Lord god have I seen the polls. Yes, I’ve heard the reports of lopsided early voting. Yes I understand the whole underpolling-the-cell-phone-users bit. But the fact is, I’m still scared half out of my brain.

Part of it is that I’ve seen so many elections go the way they weren’t supposed to – sometimes despite the polls (2002 Vermont Governor’s race anybody?). And despite all the cavalier talk of “blowouts,” even an electoral vote “blowout” will, when all is said and done, be close in terms of the popular vote. Too close for comfort.

But the thing that really has me scared is the stakes. It’s always about the stakes. I can go downtown and challenge some pool-playing hot shot to a game for a drink, and who cares? It’s just a lousy drink.

But this election feels more like a game of russian roulette. Sure, the odds are 5 in 6 that I’ll come out okay – but the stakes are withering. And consider the stakes for this election.

A McCain win would mean another war of choice with Iran. A McCain win would mean throwing economic gasoline onto our global financial firestorm, just for the sake of letting the super-rich squeeze out every last drop of money they can from a middle and working class on the brink. A McCain campaign would mean throwing environmental degradation into high gear.

But a McCain campaign would also give us a president who would be likely to become incapacitated at some point in his term, which would then bring us another president who would waste no time using the power of the office to force her frightening religious beliefs into every corner of our Republic, and whose zeal for a culture war against me and my family would only be matched by her abject incompetence at steering the ship of state through uniquely troubled waters.

So while I objectively understand where the early champagne-poppers are coming from, witnessing such premature celebrations just scares me even more. It aint over til its over, and I can’t help but feel that pretending it’s all a done deal – even if it may well be – is to not truly appreciate the totality of what’s at stake.

So tomorrow I’ll venture out into the barrel of the gun, and do my part to tip the odds our way as the trigger is pulled. And if enough of us do, hopefully when that hammer falls as the polls close, it’ll fall onto an empty chamber.

After all – the odds are on our side, right?

The VT Democratic Party completed its “100 Days, 100 Reasons Not to Vote for Jim Douglas” list today, with its number one reason being:

1. With roads and bridges deteriorating, increasing pressure on the state’s health care system and rising energy prices, Jim Douglas proposed using scarce state resources to cut taxes for the wealthy. (Rutland Herald, 1/12/08)

The top ten rounds out as:

10. Even after more public vetting has revealed Sarah Palin to be increasingly out of touch with Vermont values, Jim Douglas says he still supports her pick as John McCain’s running mate. (VPR, 10/24/08)

9. Though Jim Douglas has campaigned for six years on the slogan “Jim = Jobs,” Vermont currently has fewer jobs than before the last recession. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

8. Vermont currently has the slowest economy in New England. (Federal Reserve)

7. The unemployment rate in Vermont started trending up in 2005 and has increased 41 percent in the last three years. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

6. The rate of private sector job growth under Howard Dean in the 5 years before the 2001-2003 recession was three times faster than the rate at which private sector jobs have been created since that recession under Jim Douglas. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

5. Vermont’s rate of job growth over the past five years under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership has been half the national rate – 2.6 percent v. 5.8 percent. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

4. As we face difficult budget choices and as more and more Vermonters are losing their jobs, Jim Douglas is using taxpayer dollars to campaign to keep his by failing to reimburse the state for campaign-related expenses like mileage. (Rutland Herald, 10/30/08)

3. Since 2005, under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, Vermont has lost approximately 40 manufacturing jobs a month. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

2. After being publicly taken to task by protesting taxpayers for not reimbursing the state for campaign expenses, Jim Douglas changed his story and said he reimburses the state from his own pocket. He has produced no records to verify this claim. (Bennington Banner, 10/31/08)

The rest of the slightly duplicative, but still entertaining (and well-cited) list below the fold:

100. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, the gap between rich and poor is growing faster in Vermont that any other state but one. (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston)

99. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, 35 percent of Vermont’s 2,700 bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete — that’s eighth worst in the nation. (Federal Highway Administration)

98. Douglas’ so-called “Comprehensive Energy Plan” mentions the potential risks associated with radiation from Vermont Yankee only once. In a footnote. (DPS Energy Plan 2009, p.69)

97. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, good jobs are leaving the state: Vermont has lost 2,800 high paying jobs in the manufacturing sector since Douglas took office, a 7.3 percent drop. (Vermont Economic & Labor Market Information)

96. Douglas’ Department of Public Service has repeatedly fought funding increases for the award winning Efficiency Vermont (AP, 8/2/06; Rutland Herald, 6/25/08)

95. Though he promised Vermonters a cleaner and clearer Lake Champlain by 2009 during his first term, Douglas reversed course last year and admitted he couldn’t deliver a cleaner lake until 2017. (Times Argus, 9/10/07)

94. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, unemployment has increased to a 14-year high, from 3.7 percent in May 2004 to 4.9 percent in May 2008. (Vermont Economic & Labor Market Information)

93. In a time when Vermont desperately needs more affordable housing, Jim Douglas tried to slash the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board’s budget by 30 percent. (Burlington Free Press, 2/1/08)

92. Without real leadership from Jim Douglas, 81 percent of roads in Caledonia County have fallen into poor or very poor condition. (VPR, 4/3/08)

91. Jim Douglas supports the McCain gimmick to suspend the federal gas tax for the summer, which would cost Vermont almost $30 million and over 1,000 jobs. (VPR, 6/10/08; American Road and Transportation Builders Association)

90. In 2005, Jim Douglas vetoed a comprehensive health care reform bill would have set Vermont on the path to affordable health care for all Vermonters. (Burlington Free Press, 6/12/05)

89. In his 2008 budget proposal, Jim Douglas cut 20 percent from the fund to help towns maintain their bridges, which means towns would have to rely more on local property taxes. (Joint Fiscal Office)

88. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, the state’s workforce continues to shrink: the number of people employed dropped by about 2,000 and the labor force dropped by 1,300 between 2007 and 2008. (Times Argus, 3/12/2008)

87. In spite of his repeated campaign promises, Jim Douglas has not fully staffed the Vermont State Police in any one of his nearly six years in office. (AP, 2/21/08)

86. After nearly six years in office, Jim Douglas’ administration still doesn’t have a plan to clean up waterways damaged by storm water – the administration hasn’t decided how much work will be done, when it will start, when it will be finished or who will pay for it. (Burlington Free Press, 7/14/08)

85. In 2004, Jim Douglas passed on the opportunity to purchase the Connecticut River dams, which would have given the state over 500 megawatts of clean power. (AP, 12/10/04)

84. Job losses under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership have been widespread. Since May 2004, the following sectors have experienced losses: Manufacturing, Construction, Retail Trade, Financial Activities, Leisure & Hospitality, Accommodation and Food Services and Other Services. (Vermont Economic & Labor Market Information)

83. Even though the legislature funded special law enforcement units to investigate sex crimes two years ago, Jim Douglas still hasn’t fully established the program. (Burlington Free Press, 8/10/08)

82. With Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, 9 out of the 10 fastest growing jobs in Vermont don’t pay a wage high enough to afford a modest 2 bedroom apartment. (Vermont Housing and Finance Agency)

81. While every other New England state experienced moderate to strong growth in exports between 2006 and 2007, under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership exports from Vermont declined by 10 percent. (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston)

80. In 2007, Jim Douglas tried to raid $5.7 million from the Catamount Health Fund, even though businesses were promised the money would be used to provide coverage to uninsured Vermonters. (AP, 3/21/07)

79. Though he promised Vermonters he could leverage his close ties to the Bush White House to deliver results on issues ranging from the Circ to health care, Jim Douglas spent $70,000 taxpayer dollars on a short-term contract with a partisan D.C. lobbyist. (AP, 10/31/02; AP, 2/27/05; Rutland Herald, 9/8/07)

78. Douglas’ 2008 budget proposal slashed funding for town highway projects by almost 10 percent, which would mean local property tax hikes to fill in the gap. (Rutland Herald, 4/1/08)

77. Among many irresponsible budget proposals this year, Jim Douglas failed to fund the November elections, an expense that can so clearly be anticipated. (Times Argus, 1/25/08)

76. Jim Douglas’ 2008 budget proposal short-changed the state employees’ system $2.1 million. Not paying the bill on the retirement system costs the state more money in the long run, because the funds earn less interest. (Times Argus, 3/10/08)

75. Although the governor’s own Climate Change Commission laid out 38 concrete proposals to reduce Vermont’s impact on global warming, Jim Douglas ignored the bulk of the recommendations. (VPR, 11/20/07)

74. While Jim Douglas is quick to take credit when Catamount Heath’s successes are recognized, he continually tells Vermonters how much he dislikes the program, even going so far as to say he would have vetoed the bill. (Douglas Press Release, 12/19/06; Barton Chronicle, 10/3/07)

73. Even though the Bush tax cuts primarily benefited the wealthy and created a huge hole in the federal budget that shifted even more costs down to states, Jim Douglas said he not only supported the cuts, but he wanted them to be permanent. (Rutland Herald, 3/12/04)

72. The 2008 Management Report Card issued by the Government Performance Project gave Vermont low marks for long-range vision and leadership, citing the fact that “the dearth of talent at the top means that planning in one area requires a game of musical chairs in another.” (Governing Magazine, March 2008)

71. In 2007, 20 percent of Vermont roads were in very poor condition. With no leadership from Jim Douglas, that number is expected to rise to 50 percent in the next five years. (Rutland Herald, 4/1/08)

70. When asked if he regretted supporting George W. Bush for President in 2000 and 2004, Jim Douglas said no because he “picked the winner.” (Press conference, 10/4/07)

69. When a broad group of affordable housing advocates, homebuilders, environmentalists and legislators met throughout the summer of 2007 to work toward housing solutions, the Douglas Administration didn’t bother to take part in the discussions. (Burlington Free Press, 9/5/07)

68. While other governor’s aggressively tackled the growing foreclosure crisis, the Douglas Administration’s approach was to keep its “fingers crossed” that the crisis didn’t get worse in Vermont. (WCAX, 4/11/08)

67. Jim Douglas’ Corrections Department is staffed in part by temps with no corrections experience. (Seven Days, 4/1/08)

66. In 2003, Jim Douglas’ Department of Public Service tried to slash funding for Efficiency Vermont. (AP, 11/28/03)

65. Jim Douglas claimed that addressing global climate change isn’t critical, even though his own panel of experts said, “the climate change crisis may represent the most important and comprehensive global challenge of our lifetime.” (Rutland Herald, 10/25/07; Final Report and Recommendations of the Governor’s Commission on Climate Change, 10/07)

64. After promising workers in the contaminated Bennington Office in October 2006 that he would relocate them to a safer work environment within 30 to 45 days, it took the Douglas Administration almost 6 months to get them into temporary offices. (Vt. Dept. of Health, http://healthvermont.gov/local…

63. The Environmental Protection Agency slammed Douglas’ lackluster Lake Champlain cleanup efforts for “the lack of progress toward seeing water quality improvements … even after almost six years” of implementing the cleanup plan. (Burlington Free Press, 6/3/08)

62. Jim Douglas was chair of George W. Bush’s re-election campaign in Vermont in 2004. (Burlington Free Press, 8/29/04)

61. When Jim Douglas went to China to supposedly promote Vermont as a leader in energy efficiency, he didn’t invite efficiency companies and consultants to join the trade mission. (VPR, 6/25/07)

60. According to the Speed Matters annual survey of Internet speeds in the state, under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, Vermont is falling further behind other states in terms of Internet quality – dropping from 21st in the nation for Internet download speeds in 2007 to 38th in 2008. (SpeedMatters.org, August 2008)

59. To make up for its ability to fully staff the Vermont State Police, the Douglas Administration suggested the State Police recruit from local departments, which would serve only to shift the problem down to local communities. (Bennington Banner, 2/22/08)

58. Even though Jim Douglas’ budget proposals have shorted the Town Bridge Fund over $4.5 million since 2002, his administration blamed the closure of the Richmond bridge on the town. (Joint Fiscal Office; Times Argus, 9/6/08)

57. Toeing the Republican Party line, Jim Douglas said that the scandal ridden, anti-environmental, anti-choice, anti-gay, pro-pork Sarah Palin “shares a lot of the values of the people of Vermont.” (Press Conference, 9/2/08)

56. When the legislature worked to add $1 million to the weatherization budget this year to help keep Vermonters warm this winter, Jim Douglas grabbed the microphone and took credit for the work, even though his administration was slow to get the money in the hands of Vermonters. (VPR, 7/8/08)

55. While Jim Douglas claimed his so-called “New Neighborhoods” proposal would result in 400 new homes this year, expert testimony from the Vermont Realtors Association suggests fewer than 200 homes would be built and construction wouldn’t begin for 12 – 18 months. (H. Nat. Res. Com. Testimony, 2/14/08)

54. In 2005, Jim Douglas strongly opposed efforts to institute a Renewable Energy Standard, which would have required utility companies to incorporate a certain amount of renewable energy into their portfolios. (Burlington Free Press, 1/3/05)

53. To gain some good publicity, Jim Douglas announced in April a $500,000 grant to help keep Vermont Tubbs in Brandon. In July, when the company closed up shop, the administration admitted that Vermont Tubbs never asked for nor received the money. The result of Jim Douglas’ publicity stunt? 90 jobs lost. (Douglas press release, 4/15/08; Burlington Free Press, 7/11/08)

52. The Douglas Administration has failed to enforce laws intended to ensure that rental housing units are safe for Vermont families: In the six years with Jim Douglas at the helm, the did not bring a single legal action against a landlord, even though state inspectors have found over 4,000 violations in that time. (St. Albans Messenger, 8/28/08)

51. In his six years in office, Jim Douglas’ budget proposals have shorted school construction funds a total of $26 million, which would shift those costs on to local school budgets. (Joint Fiscal Office)

50. Just as he was Vermont’s highest profile supporter of George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, Jim Douglas is now behind John McCain, even though he’s voted against the MILC program and twice against LIHEAP. (Burlington Free Press, 2/20/08; S Amdt 3074 to S Con Res 83; S Amdt 2194 to HR 3010)

49. When, after six years of Jim Douglas at the helm, the bridge connecting Middlesex to Moretown was closed, the administration refused to take responsibility. Instead, it blamed “environmental, historic and archeological roadblocks.” (Times Argus, 6/18/08)

48. Jim Douglas’ Corrections Department doesn’t have enough staff to supervise all sex offenders. (WCAX, 7/16/08)

47. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, the top three occupations in Vermont with the highest projected number of annual job openings are retail salespersons, cashiers and waiters and waitresses. The average incomes for workers in these jobs in Vermont are $21,600, $18,050 and $17,160 respectively. (Vermont Economic & Labor Market Information)

46. Since Jim Douglas took office in 2002, state support for the University of Vermont has dropped from $5,003 per student per year to $4,624 per year. (Burlington Free Press, 9/9/08)

45. Internal administration emails about state job cuts revealed that high-ranking administration officials discussed changing social workers’ job titles to cover up the fact that the administration was trying to slash those positions. (AP, 9/4/08)

44. Jim Douglas’ budget proposal this year shorted hospitals $8 million – meaning hospitals would be responsible for making up the shortfall caused by the additional cost shift. Already, the Medicaid cost shift drives up insurance premiums an estimated 9 percent. (VPR, 2/25/08)

43. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, median household income dropped 4.7 percent between 2004-05 and 2006-07, down to just over $50,000. That’s the second largest decline in the nation. (Burlington Free Press, 8/27/08)

42. In spite of the fact that Vermont is ranked eighth worst in the nation in terms of the condition of our bridges, the Douglas administration only plans to fix 54 of Vermont’s structurally deficient bridges this year. That’s just 12 percent. (Burlington Free Press, 9/14/08)

41. While our roads and bridges are crumbling, Jim Douglas is using Agency of Transportation dollars to pay for communications positions in his own office. (Seven Days, 9/10/08)

40. The cost of tuition, room and board after financial aid for low and middle-income students at public colleges and universities in Vermont under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership represents over 60 percent of family income. (National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 2006)

39. In 2004, Douglas promised to deliver 90 percent broadband coverage to Vermonters by 2007. At the beginning of September 2008, final estimates of the amount of broadband coverage weren’t even completed, but experts said up to 50 percent of the state still lacked coverage. (Rutland Herald, 9/3/08)

38. As the legislature worked to write an affordable housing bill, Jim Douglas fought to increase the definition of an “affordable” home to $275,000 — not very affordable for most Vermonters. (Burlington Free Press, 2/18/08)

37. Earlier this year, Jim Douglas tried to lease the state lottery to Wall Street — specifically, to the now failed Lehman Brothers. (Rutland Herald, 9/16/08)

36. In 2005, Jim Douglas proposed a three percent tax on health insurance premiums. (AP, 5/12/05)

35. It was only after photos of the Vermont Yankee cooling tower collapse outraged Vermonters that Jim Douglas flip-flopped and followed Democratic leaders in calling for an independent safety assessment of the plant. (Brattleboro Reformer, 11/14/07)

34. In 2007, with roads and bridges continuing to crumble, Jim Douglas proposed 7.6 percent less money than the year before for summer construction projects. (Burlington Free Press, 4/10/07)

33. Six out of ten of the fastest growing jobs in Vermont pay below the federal poverty line. (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston)

32. Even with our roads and bridges further crumbling, the Douglas Administration resisted the legislature’s efforts to devote some of the $29 million budget surplus in 2007 to eliminate the deficit in the Transportation Fund. (VPR, 5/9/07)

31. Even as Wall Street is mired in perhaps the most significant economic crisis of our lifetime, Jim Douglas said he still supports Social Security privatization schemes. (VPR, 10/3/08)

30. Jim Douglas gambled $7 million in this year’s budget on the bet that the State Hospital would be recertified and receive federal funding. That certification and the accompanying federal funding were denied, creating another $7 million hole in the state budget. (VPR, 10/3/08)

29. Jim Douglas vetoed a bill that would have required Entergy to fully fund the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee, potentially sticking Vermont taxpayers with the $400 million clean-up bill. (Burlington Free Press, 5/8/08)

28. In 2007, Jim Douglas vetoed a bill that would have expanded net metering to encourage the use of renewable energy. A month before the election, Jim Douglas flip-flopped and announced net metering as a major component of his so-called economic development plan. (AP, 5/20/07; Press Release, 9/30/08)

27. Jim Douglas flip-flopped on whether the legislature should elect the candidate with the most votes should he or she fail to garner 50 percent of the vote. In 2002, Douglas said the legislature should exercise its authority to decide the election. Now he says the legislature should not. (AP, 11/3/02; VPR, 9/24/08)

26. Between 2004 and 2008, public sector jobs have increased 2.2 percent while private sector jobs have decreased .01 percent. If not for an increase in government jobs since 2004, Vermont would have experienced an overall loss of jobs under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

25. Rather than tackle the deteriorating condition of our roads, the Douglas Administration simply reclassified roads – labeling previously “very poor” roads as only “poor” and previously “poor” roads as “fair.” (Rutland Herald, 3/3/08)

24. According to one of the five members of the Vermont Yankee Oversight Panel created by the legislature to provide a thorough and public evaluation of the plant’s reliability, the Douglas administration continues to obstruct panel members’ access to critical information about the plant. (Brattleboro Reformer, 10/10/08)

23. The Federal Transportation Fund faces a multi-billion dollar shortfall. This year, Vermont received $203 million from the federal government to help maintain our crumbling roads and bridges. In spite of our heavy reliance on those federal funds, this summer, Jim Douglas supported a suspension of the federal gas tax, the primary funding source for the strained Federal Transportation Fund. (VPR, 6/10/08)

22. Vermont has lost 2,000 private sector jobs since Jim Douglas was last elected in 2006. (Vt. Dept. of Labor)

21. While Jim Douglas claimed last month that his administration has “made progress” in establishing Special Investigative Units to help investigate and convict sex offenders, a State Police detective this month described the unit in Rutland as still a “patchwork.” (VPR, 9/25/08; Rutland Herald, 10/12/08)

20. In 2006, Jim Douglas tried to pay for “Promise Scholarships” with money already promised elsewhere – namely tobacco settlement money intended to help pay for health care costs. (Burlington Free Press, 4/29/06)

19. Jim Douglas supports building wind projects and spurring the economy in Quebec – but not here in Vermont. (WCAX, 10/6/08)

18. A political science professor at UVM described one of Jim Douglas’ attack ads this year as “beyond bogus.” (VPR, 10/17/08)

17. Under Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, foreclosures rose 41 percent statewide and 74 percent in Chittenden County over the past year. Yet, as the crisis became more apparent earlier this year, the Douglas Administration said its approach was to keep its “fingers crossed” that the problem didn’t get worse. (Burlington Free Press, 10/15/08; WCAX, 4/11/08)

16. Over the past five years of Jim Douglas’ failed leadership, an average of 23.6 Vermont bridges have been built or reconstructed per year. The average over the five years before Jim Douglas took office was 36.6 bridges per year. (Agency of Transportation, 8/20/08)

15. Vermont today has fewer private sector jobs than when Jim Douglas took office in 2003. (VPR, 10/1/08)

14. Even after turmoil on Wall Street and learning that the Vermont Yankee decommissioning fund has lost $40 million – 10 percent of its value – Jim Douglas said he does not regret vetoing a bill that would have ensured the plant’s owners, not Vermont taxpayers, pay to clean up the plant. (VPR, 10/9/08)

13. Jim Douglas’ repeated attempts over the past six years to shift transportation and other costs onto towns would have raised property taxes by over $103 million dollars. (Joint Fiscal Office)

12. Jim Douglas has failed to develop a plan to draw down federal transportation dollars set aside for Vermont. His administration has left almost $140 million in federal funding for our roads and bridges on the table. (AP, 10/18/08)

11. After trumpeting his bipartisan work with legislature to make budget cuts, Jim Douglas’ administration sent letters to seniors blaming the legislature for reductions in services, even though the cut was one proposed by the administration in the first place. (Burlington Free Press, 10/24/08)

How much money does it take to run for the State House in Vermont? $1000? $2000? Legislative recruiters will tell you to aim for $5k or $6k.

So what is Rick Hube (R WINDHAM-BENNINGTON-WINDSOR-1) doing running on $30,000???

Hube (whose district includes Jamaica, Londonderry, Stratton, Weston and Winhall) is, of course, among the more hard right Rs in the state. He’s certainly no friend of campaign finance issues, even before he started raking in this kind of money – and in past years, although he’s done quite well, he hasn’t brought in this kinda coin ($10k has been his norm in recent cycles). Much of the money has come in a few large, out of state chunks. There are significant contributions flowing from his campaign as well, such as $2000 to the Douglas for Governor campaign, but there doesn’t seem to be any sign that there is any kind of pass-through laundering scheme going on. Unfortunately I’ve had no time to really get into this as a research project, but everything seems to meet the letter of the law, at any rate.

Anything untoward to see – at least in appearence – well, that’s another story.

Hube has given almost $1,000 of his campaign money to local charities throughout the campaign, including $500 to the Londonderry Fireworks Committee, $200 to the Jamaica Old Home Days Parade, and $308.48 to buy lapel pins for high school students going on an international trip. Vermont campaign finance laws specifically allow a candidate to make these kinds of donations with excess funds at the end of a campaign, but the law isn’t really designed to address such expenditures during a campaign. It sort of assumes a candidate will be  – you know – spending the money on getting elected. Still – it’s not outlawed under statute, but it does raise some obvious questions about the potential for a politician with a prodigious bank account to financially curry favor with local interests.

In fact, careful observers in the district might have noticed that after the $308.48 Hube gave to the Leland and Gray High School ‘Journey East’ program, Tom Connor, the Program Director, sent a letter to the editor to several Vermont newspapers in support of Hube’s re-election.

At the very least, it makes for an issue the legislature should look at more closely.

But what is the story? Why so much money? One might wonder if he hasn’t started fundraising and listbuilding early for a statewide run next time – raising money that he can carry over as excess funds for a jumpstart – possibly even scare other would-be competitors off with a warchest (modest as it may be). But what would that race be? Secretary of State? Treasurer? That might be a logical jump, but given that the Republicans have no bench – who knows? US House? US Senate? Or maybe Governor if Leahy retires and Jim Douglas makes a move to run against – perhaps – Peter Welch for the spot?

The mind boggles.

Hube’s opponent – Tom Buchanan – is a good guy who will have a tough time unseating him Tuesday. With any luck, he will and this mystery becomes moot as Hube becomes neutralized. In any event, Hube is clearly somebody to keep an eye on.

The 11th Hour surge in energy and aggressiveness from Symington on the issue of Jim Douglas’s use of public resources for campaign purposes comes as much (or more) from the VT Democratic Party proper and Nate Freeman leading the grassroots as it does from the actual Symington campaign. It certainly could’ve come two weeks ago, bouncing as it is off of the reporting from Seven Days’ Shay Totten, but its heartening to see regardless.

But the unspoken question on the lips of many, given the dramatic change of political fortunes seemingly taking place, is whether or not this last minute surge isn’t ultimately to the electoral benefit of Anthony Pollina, rather than Symington herself. It’s a tough question.

The art of looking at poll numbers is in the attempting to discern cause from effect. Usually its not too hard. In the latest R2K poll, there are three numbers of note: the huge increase in Pollina’s numbers, the significant drop in Symington’s numbers, and the huge increase in Symington’s negatives. Cause and effect are clear here – you don’t decide you dislike a candidate because you don’t want to vote for them, you decide you don’t want to vote for a candidate because you dislike them. Clearly, Symington’s negatives are the driving force in the huge difference between this poll and the last R2K poll. The financial disclosures issue lit a fuse that has continued to burn steadily and quickly, eating up much of her goodwill and opening the door for Douglas to cast further doubts on her character by whatever means he can think of. There’s no question that the disclosure issue will be remembered as a turning point. And in Vermont, all it takes is finding and exploiting one key negative narrative to step on a campaign. With only 400,000 voters, political changes – as a matter of percentages – have the potential to turn faster here than any other state in the union. They just don’t, usually.

On the Progressive side, as outraged as many Dems were, Pollina hasn’t taken a hit from his latest campaign finance challenge. With that off the table, he really hasn’t been making mistakes (and as I noted recently, he’s been fairly creative with outside-the-box organizing). Nor has he been so ready to beat up on Democrats as a collective entity, narrowcasting his criticism to Montpelier instead.

And the massive increase in Symington’s negatives also suggest that the Pollina’s increases aren’t due so much to his own messaging, so much as his positioning to be the beneficiary of Symington’s stumbling (given the lack of his own of late). As such, he seems – both from the recent poll and anecdotally – to have broken out of the single-digit doldrums. Voters may be allowing him a “reboot” and we could easily see him repeat his numbers against Shumlin.

If I had to bet money, I’d still think that he will end up in third, but just barely. Douglas’s tone has certainly changed. Last week, Douglas seemed to be going out of his way to promote Pollina’s candidacy, presumably because of the effect it has on Symington’s numbers and with an eye towards keeping the runner up well out of the range where a legislative promotion of a non-Douglas candidate is politically easy. As I said, if Douglas were serious about Pollina, he’d be getting mean. It’s what he does.

Well, in the last couple days, Douglas has gotten mean, hitting Pollina on the Milk Company troubles. Now that does mean he’s up in the polls.

It’s an interesting game of fine-tuning going on. It seems unlikely to impossible that either Pollina or Symington on their own could keep Douglas below 50%, despite the inevitable crowing of both sides. Douglas’s job is to fine tune his negative attacks and the resultant peaks and troughs in the polls of his opponents to keep them largely canceling each other out and preventing one or the other from getting close enough to pull off a legislative coup. Something he seems to be doing masterfully.

But back to the original point: Does this latest push from Symington benefit her campaign or Pollina’s? In the twin bubbles of Washington and Chittenden Counties, anecdotal evidence runs high that the clear, unprecedented surge in early voting is benefitting Pollina more than Symington – but it can be hard to see the rest of the state from here when one is depending on anecdotes. Die-hard Progressives are certainly confident, as they have been far more solicitous to me of late with the “it’s all about Douglas” and “we have to pull together” comments (the exceptions of a few posters on this blog notwithstanding). Even with some “oh yeah, we’d support Gaye if she came in second” stuff that I very specifically was not hearing before. Human nature being what it is, that’s a good sign they have less concern about Symington actually coming in second, and that Mr. Pollina’s comments to Mark Johnson that “Boy I wouldn’t want to be the governor who came in second, to tell you the truth.” are so no longer operative, if indeed they ever were.

Let’s hope this new rhetorical reality is consistent (even if next Tuesday doesn’t go as Pollina supporters hope), and that Symington supporters can match it, if necessary. Getting the legislature to move on the number two if he or she is not within 10 is going to be like pushing a boulder uphill, and they’re going to need the support of the number three to have any chance at all.

More detailed breakouts of the recent poll from Research 2000 commissioned by WCAX below the fold. They include some details on the highly-discussed Governor poll, but also polling on the Presidential race, as well as the elections for Secretary of State, Attorney General and Lieutenant Governor (with Costello only 14 points behind Dubie).

R2k does a great job with Vermont. I wish the sample sizes were a little bigger (a 5% margin of error is a bit high for political geeks), but that’s what WCAX is willing to pay for, I guess.

Methodology and sample:

Those interviewed were selected by the random variation of the last four digits of telephone numbers. A cross-section of exchanges was utilized in order to ensure an accurate reflection of the state. Quotas were assigned to reflect the voter registration of distribution by county.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 5% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the “true” figure would fall within that range if the entire population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any subgroup, such as a gender or region.

SAMPLE FIGURES

Men                        189    (48%)

Women                   211   (52%)

North                      255   (64%)

South                      145   (36%)

PRESIDENTIAL RACE:

QUESTION: If the election for President were held today, would you vote for the Democratic ticket of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the Republican ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin, or another candidate?

                                OBAMA        MCCAIN    OTHER    UNDECIDED

ALL                             57%                36%             3%               4%

MEN                            53%                40%             4%               3%

WOMEN                     61%                32%             2%               5%

NORTH                       55%                38%             4%               3%

SOUTH                       61%                33%             2%               4%

GOVERNOR RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Jim Douglas                    50%          42%                  8%

Gaye Symington             34%          45%                21%

Anthony Pollina              45%         35%                 20%

QUESTION:  If the election for Governor were held today, would you vote for Gaye Symington, the Democrat, Jim Douglas, the Republican, Anthony Pollina, an Independent, or another candidate?

                     DOUGLAS      SYMINGTON    POLLINA    OTH    UNDECIDED

ALL                   47%                  24%                    23%            2%             4%

MEN                  50%                  20%                    25%            2%             3%

WOMEN           44%                  28%                    21%            2%             5%

NORTH             49%                  22%                    23%            2%             4%

SOUTH             42%                  28%                    24%            2%              4%

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Brian Dubie                     48%          36%               16%

Tom Costello                   39%         15%                46%

QUESTION: If the election for Lieutenant Governor were held today, would you vote for Tom Costello, the Democrat, Brian Dubie, the Republican, or another candidate?

                   DUBIE       COSTELLO      OTHER     UNDECIDED

ALL                47%             33%                   2%              18%

MEN               50%             31%                   3%              16%

WOMEN        44%             35%                   1%               20%

NORTH          48%             32%                   2%               18%

SOUTH          45%             34%                   2%               19%

ATTORNEY GENERAL RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Bill Sorrell                      47%           24%               29%                    

Karen Kerin                    28%           27%               45%

QUESTION: If the election for Attorney General were held today, would you vote for Bill Sorrell, the Democrat, Karen Kerin, the Republican, or another candidate?

                               SORRELL        KERIN        OTHER       UNDECIDED

ALL                            58%                33%               1%                      8%

MEN                           57%                35%               1%                      7%

WOMEN                    59%                31%               1%                      9%

NORTH                      57%                34%               1%                      8%

SOUTH                      60%                31%                1%                     8%

SECRETARY OF STATE RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Deb Markowitz               51%         24%               25%

Eugene Bifano                31%         18%               51%        

QUESTION: If the election for Secretary of State were held today, would you vote for Deb Markowitz, the Democrat, Eugene Bifano, the Republican, or another candidate?

                   MARKOWITZ      BIFANO      OTHER     UNDECIDED

ALL                    55%                     34%               1%                 10%

MEN                   51%                     38%               1%                 10%        

WOMEN            59%                     30%               1%                 10%

NORTH              54%                     36%               1%                   9%          

SOUTH              58%                      30%               1%                11%

So. The Obamamercial has come and gone. Little to no content, but there was never going to be any content. If that’s what you were looking for, you were fooling yourself.

This was always about campaign theater. Heartstring persuasion writ large. And as a former electioneer myself, I could hardly wait. Nobody has ever done anything like this before, and I was dying to see what they would do and how well they’d pull it off.

And wow, did they. They nailed it. Just enough schmaltz. Sprinkles of the beginnings of policy content throughout, to give the illusion of content. This was a universe removed from Ross Perot and his charts and likely homed in like a laser beam on many in the swing voter set.

Now would I like beef? Content? Sure. But again, this wasn’t made for me. I knew that going in. Judged on its own terms against its own goals, I think it was a freakin’ masterpiece. And the fact that the last World Series game was forced into a rain delay in what otherwise could’ve been the series finale – that was an act of god, man. Having the World Series audience as a lead in bumped this to a whole new level.

Wow. We’ll see the ratings. If nobody watched it, I’ll have to eat my words, but I think we will see this create a noticeable bump in the polls.