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.
