VT-GOV.-Could Sanders Run?

[Bidenworth2020]

in all likelyhood he would beat Scott, and this puts him in just as good a position to run for prez if he wants, and he could kinda be like a president before his death, so I think it would be a ok idea.

[Kamala]

VT's governorship is effectively worthless, Sanders is infinitely more powerful as Senator.

[_]

What value is there in gaining VT-Gov and losing the most powerful progressive voice you have in the Senate?

[UncleSam]

Were this any other state or situation this would be a terrible idea.

However, there are a few things going for it:
1. VT is Safe D on the federal level, so it's not like Dems would be risking anything
2. This is Bernie's last term most likely regardless
3. Governor experience is somewhat more applicable to the presifency, and if Bernie were looking to run this would be at worst a sidestep, and maybe a slight step forward while reclaiming a governor's mansion that Dems should hold.

That being said it won't happen (Bernie will not leave the senate), and in terms of national politics Bernie has a bigger voice in the senate by far. Kind of a unique situation though due to his age, ambitions, and Vermont's political oddness.

[Heisenberg]

I echo what others said. He's much, MUCH more powerful being a Senator, especially entering his third term, than being governor of a small state. Large state governors are much more powerful than small state governors (because they game more influence, of course).

[libertpaulian]

I echo what others said. He's much, MUCH more powerful being a Senator, especially entering his third term, than being governor of a small state. Large state governors are much more powerful than small state governors (because they game more influence, of course).

Bill Clinton would like a word with you.

[Rjjr77]

I echo what others said. He's much, MUCH more powerful being a Senator, especially entering his third term, than being governor of a small state. Large state governors are much more powerful than small state governors (because they game more influence, of course).

a lot of it depends on the state constitutions, West Virginia, Utah, and Hawaii  have very strong governors.

[Blair]

I echo what others said. He's much, MUCH more powerful being a Senator, especially entering his third term, than being governor of a small state. Large state governors are much more powerful than small state governors (because they game more influence, of course).

Bill Clinton would like a word with you.

But Clinton had a reason to be a Governor; IIRC the senate seats were both locked and running for Governor gave him a profile as part of the 'New South', and later DLC type democrat.

But yes, why would Sanders want to go from attending healthcare rallies, raising cash for progressives, and everything else that comes with the Senate, to having to deal with the latest foot and mouth outbreak, or what else comes with being Governor.

There's a reason that you have a lot of Senators who are in their 70s, and 80s but very few governors.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

in all likelyhood he would beat Scott, and this puts him in just as good a position to run for prez if he wants, and he could kinda be like a president before his death, so I think it would be a ok idea.

Leaving national politics spotlight for an obscure job? How is this a good idea?

Beside, he'd have less than two years between inauguration and presidential election. It just won't fly.

[Lord Admirale]

What

[Nyvin]

VT Gov is a pitiful position.  They're elected to two year terms and probably have some the weakest executive power of any gov in the country.   Sanders would be better off retiring altogether.

[Coraxion]

What value is there in gaining VT-Gov and losing the most powerful progressive voice you have in the Senate?

Vermont being red on the map of governors looks bad.

[BlueDogDemocrat]

I don't see any reason why he would want to and or should.

[PragmaticPopulist]

Along with what everyone else said (except Cora), VT only has an at-large congressional district, and is showing no sign of gaining a second one anytime soon. Democrats would be better off taking down Sununu in NH, who's been implementing voter suppression laws and could gerrymander out Kuster or Shea-Porter.

[Figueira]

What value is there in gaining VT-Gov and losing the most powerful progressive voice you have in the Senate?

Vermont being red on the map of governors looks bad.

Not so much if Democrats can win places like Wyoming, Oklahoma, Kansas, and South Carolina.

[MAINEiac4434]

[Kingpoleon]

I echo what others said. He's much, MUCH more powerful being a Senator, especially entering his third term, than being governor of a small state. Large state governors are much more powerful than small state governors (because they game more influence, of course).

Bill Clinton would like a word with you.

Arkansas is nicely positioned - neither Midwestern, nor Deep South, nor Northeastern, nor Western. It's a pretty good place for politicians with big names - Robinson, Fulbright, Faubus, Rockefeller, Huckabee, Bumpers, Cotton, and a host of others can attest to that.