So here’s an idea that, if taken seriously and agreed to by all four announced and rumored gubernatorial candidates (and any other emerging contenders), could really be a game changer in Vermont, regardless of whether the primary date is moved:
What if all four — Susan Bartlett, Deb Markowitz, Doug Racine, and Peter Shumlin — campaigned for the entire pre-Primary period solely against Jim Douglas, and not against each other?!
That’s what needs to happen to make Jim Douglas go away.
The pluses:
1. Four (or more) cannons aimed at the major target (“eyes on the prize”).
2. Less intra-party acrimony, more party unity post-primary.
3. It would keep Douglas’s PR/campaign people busy.
4. Voters would finally understand what a mess Douglas has made of the state, given evidence from four (plus) different credible people every week of the campaign.
More below the fold …
5. It might increase primary and general election voter participation, countering voter disengagement due to internecine sniping.
6. Primary voters would get to choose which candidate had the best plan to defeat Douglas and the best vision for Vermont, instead of which candidate had the cleverest put-downs of the others or was best at beating up other Democrats.
7. The successful candidate would have plenty of ammunition to use in the final 8 weeks of the campaign.
It would be like a job interview test-task. The task is to campaign effectively against Jim Douglas and his record; the candidate who does the best job of that, gets the job of challenging the Governor with a party that is united in support of the goal: defeating Jim Douglas (and Brian Dubie, don’t forget).
Wouldn’t THAT be amazing?!
Now, just stifle your inner cynic for a few minutes and imagine what that kind of campaign would look like, and how it could transform both the Vermont Democratic Party and future campaigns.
Could we do it? Could someone with pull in the the VDP broker that deal with some teeth? (Making access to the VDP Voter File contingent on signing on is probably a ship that has sailed, but there must be something else on that order of magnitude that would provide a sweet enough carrot to encourage buy-in to the idea.)
Could party activists provide enough pressure to get all the contenders to sign on to a unified targeting agreement? Even as few as four phasers all trained on the same spot can crack an enemy’s armor (or so we learned from Kirk and crew).
C’mon, say it with me: “Imagine …” “Hope …” “I have a dream …”
A wonderful idea .Perhaps a coordinated Gov.and Lt. Gov.ticket could be formed that could tackle Douglas and Dubie as a unified effort.Races for each office are treated as sideshows of each other rather than part of a whole.
Lt.Gov.Dubie was semi coherently cackling yesterday on VPR about his emergency flu preparations while Douglas was celebrating National Road Paving Day or some such thing .These guys gotta go .
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I certainly would like to see Jim Douglas be the main topic of conversation. On the other hand, I have nothing against civil debate – and that means contrasting yourself against your opponent.
I don’t think all such contrasting is inherently nasty. Why would it be? I think there are nasty ways to do it, sure, but I really think there’s nothing wrong with saying “this is how I differ from my opponent.”
If somebody gets nasty, we should give ’em hell. If somebody gets petty or dishonest we should give ’em hell. Other than that, what’s the problem, really? Seems like, at this point, this is a solution in search of one.
Nice idea, but that’s a hell of a lot of ego to put aside.