Talk Elections

Note that all three of these candidates are considered to be "major party" candidates in Vermont. The Vermont Progressive Party elected a mayor in Burlington (the largest city in the state), and has six seats in the Vermont House of Representatives. It is the strongest minor party in any individual US state.

Who do you support? Who do you think will win?

This election is notable, because Anthony Pollina of the Progressives has a chance of winning. However, the Democrat would have to do very poorly for him to win.

How does Vermont's system work? Straight plurality?

Yes. Personally, while Pollina may well take second, I can't see Douglas losing reelection to divided opposition.

Ah. In that case, I must be confusing it with some other state. Which one had the provision that mandates election by the legislature if no candidate reaches 50%?

Hmm, interesting. Last I heard, (this was a few months ago) Pollina was trying to form some kind of deal with the Democrats to get them to not run a candidate and endorse him. I guess that must have fallen through.

Oh, no, maybe that is Vermont. I was just thinking of those using run-offs. There might be serious infighting within the Democrats over whether to support Douglas or Pollina in the event of that choice, though (partially because supporting Pollina would mean a stronger VT Progressive Party in the future, which is dangerous to them).

Apparently Pollina recently decided to be listed on the ballot as "independent" rather than Progressive. However, he also says that isn't abandoning his party either: http://www.anthonypollina.com/news/2008/07/21/building-an-independent-coalition/

BTW, Douglas won with around 45% of the vote in 2002.

in 2002, his opponent allowed the vote to stand and conceded.  but he could have taken it to the legislature.

anyway, i support douglas.

Is Douglas in trouble or something. I thought he was a lock.

Republicans controlled the state legislature in 2002 anyway, I'm pretty sure.

Douglas saved his bacon (or tofurky, this being VT) by vetoeing that IRV bill. But it's not over yet. If Douglas falls below 50%, the D leg. will pick Symington.

Especially because she's Speaker of the House.

Going into that election, the Republicans had an overall majority in the Legislature and I guess were expected to keep it.  Douglas's Democratic opponent, somebody Racine, pledged not to seek election by the Legislature if he failed to receive a majority.  Perhaps he assumed the Republicans would keep overall control of the Legislature and elect Douglas anyway, and he didn't want Vermont to be bitterly divided over the outcome.  Racine led in the polls throughout most if not all of the campaign I believe, but below 50% at least towards the end.  As it turned out, the Democrats won an overall majority in the Legislature in the 2002 elections and it was that Legislature who would choose the governor if no candidate received a majority.  (I'm not sure if the candidates other than the top two could have been selected, particularly if one of the two dropped out; could the Legislature have elected Cornellius (sp?) Hogan if they had wanted to?)  But Racine kept his word (and he had lost the popular vote, 42% to 45%, which was, according to the Almanacs of American Politics from 2004 on, "something of a surprise") and Douglas became governor.  Douglas got 59% of the vote in 2004 and 56% in 2006, so Vermont's 50% rule hasn't mattered.  Howard Dean only barely got 50.45% of the vote in 2000 when the Republicans gained an overall majority in the Legislature, and as zealous as the Republican base was in Vermont in 2000, if .46% of the vote had gone from Dean to Anthony Pollina I doubt it would have mattered that Dean polled over 12% more than Ruth Dwyer and that the Dean + Pollina vote (Pollina had run to Dean's left) was over 60%.  Dwyer might well have lost in 2002 though, and the Democrats might have controlled everything in Vermont right now.  They probably will after Douglas retires, not that I think he's safe now.

Well, in the time I took writing this post the basic point I was making was made, but I spent to much time not to post it.

Well that is good to know. Hopefully that will weaken the urge amongst some left-wing voters to vote for the "lesser-evil" Democrat rather than Pollina. I'd also like to see Douglas defeated as well, because he vetoed IRV and the NPVIC.

Yes, that's what bugs me about Douglas. The rest is fine, but those vetoes: yuck.

Vermont Democrats couldn't possibly be that stupid.

Note: Pollina pulled 9.5% in 2000 against Howard Dean.

So it would be more intelligent for them to back the incumbent Republican or an independent?

I know this has nothing to do with the Gubernatorial Election but I think that the Vermont Progressives should consider being part of the Greens. You know, smaller states are easier to start with because you don't need that much money for advertising and you don't need that many votes.

Joining the Greens would be jumping the shark, causing a complete loss of relevance. Nobody likes the Greens. They're still the Ralph Nader party.

They can't do that -- they actually have elected officeholders.

No party wants to go down the road of joke-party status and irrelevance.

Actually, the Green Party has around 230 elected officials nationwide, including the mayor of a city in California with over 100,000 people (Richmond).

That being said, I do not see the point in having the Vermont Progressives (or the Working Families Party) merge with the Greens currently. If there was PR and party lists for parliamentary elections in the US, then it would make sense though.

It would be more intelligent to support whomever gets the most popular votes, no?

No, if Anthony Pollina and Gaye Symington receive more votes combined than Jim Douglas, then it is clear that the majority of the voters wanted to elect someone to the left of Douglas. Therefore, in that case, the legislature should give the seat to Symington or Pollina.

Sorry, let me qualify: they actually have elected officeholders in partisan positions. The Greens have plenty of people they slip in to nonpartisan elections, but aside from John Eder (and that was only for like, 2 terms), can't get anyone elected to a partisan office.

Ten years ago yes. I think the GOP is all but dead in Vermont that the chance to take out the only remaining Republican in the state would outweigh whatever damage it would do. Plus they will come under enormous pressure from the Daily Kos base to not give up the governorship and for the individuals legislators the threat of primary challengers matters more. Democrats generally are in a much more partisan mood than in 2002. I also think it would depend on the Presidential results. If Obama lost, the Democrats would be under enormous pressure to lash out against someone and Douglas would be an easy target.

That said, Douglas would be smart to nail Symington on pledging to abide by the results. If Symington does, as both Racine and Dwyer did, then it would be hard for the leglisator to elect anyone other than Douglas.

I know that the Vermont Progressive Party has won many partisan elections, which I mentioned in my first post in this thread. However, the Green Party has also won many partisan elections as well (not just for state legislature in Maine, but also for city councilor and similar positions in a number of states). It is hard to say how many, because the ballot laws vary from state to state. For example, here in Nebraska even the legislature elections are non-partisan, while the city council/mayor elections have partisan labels.

They can very credibly make the argument in the case of a, say, 40R-35D-25P result that the people preferred a Democrat.

I'm supporting Douglas, and he'll likely win.  If he could win in 2006, he can win in 2008.

If you dig far enough, you can probably find a prediction of mine that Scudder Parker would make it a close race in 2006.

I'm not making that same mistake again...unless I can see some damn good evidence that Douglas is doing poorly, I'm not going to be convinced that he's in trouble.

Yeah, but what are the chances that Douglas drops that many points from 2006?

     Agreed. It seems like Pollina would cannibalize Symington alot more than he would Douglas. Since this is Vermont, he will take something from Douglas though.

Who said I was postulating a likely result? Certainly for Douglas to drop below 50%, Pollina has to be pulling a pretty big share of the vote directly from him (not at all unlikely). And Symington would probably have done better than Scudder Parker in 2006, if not much better.

Here's how I see it:

Pollina can't win.
If Douglas gets a majority, he wins.
If Douglas doesn't get a majority, Symington wins.

I'm really liking Douglas to take this one. I just don't see Symington doing that much better than Scudder Parker. Pollina has no chance of winning.

I don't want to make a new thread about this, so I'll stick it in here: the Republican candidate for Attorney General in Vermont is a M2F transsexual (http://www.kerinforattorneygeneral.us/) (not to mention crackpot).

     Since this is Vermont, I guess this makes that race safe Republican now. :P

Does Kerin just run for any old office every two years?

She lost the Republican primary for the House in 2002 and for Attorney General in 2004 and 2006. She did manage to get the Republican nomination for the House in 2000 by virtue of being the only candidate on the ballot, then won 19% of the vote against Bernie Sanders.

Dwyer had made that pledge in 2000?  I remember reading that Dean was effectively only barely reelected in 2000 because the Republican Legislature would have voted in Dwyer.  And I had read that Racine plegged not to contest the election in the Legislature even if he got a plurality of the vote as was expected (but didn't happen) but not a majority.

Thats nothing. In 2006 5% of the voters in the GOP primary voted for a guy that wanted to legalise Marijuana and impeach Bush.

Douglas is probably safe, but this is Vermont and anything is possible. 
What about Lt. Governor Brain Dubie(R) he is pro-life and yet was elected in 2002 and reelected in 2004, 2006?

This state is weird! 

Dubie owed his initial election to Democratic-Progressive (Pollina actually) vote-splitting I believe, but his remaining in office as a not particularly moderate (if at all) Republican is impressive.  I'm not sure what his reelection percentages have been.

2006 was his closest race: He only won by 5.7%.  A part of that is probably attributable to his flirtation with running for Congress.

He won by 20% in 2004.  He was initially elected in 2002 by a 9% margin.

SATAN!!!

Dwyer did not make the pledge pr-election, but she conceded early on election night before the votes were counted. At the time it was clear she was around ten points behind Dean, but not that Dean was above 50%. She made it pretty clear at the time she had no interest in contesting it.

In the general election of 2000, did a sizeable number of conservatives vote for her? It appears she was the only non-leftist on the ballot.

I'd love to see Douglas to pick up a senate seat when Leahy retires.