So, the challenger has announced. Given the history of Democratic candidate messaging in recent years (y'know – being milquetoast when they should be bold, mushy when they should be firm, nasty when they should be gracious, vague when the should be detailed, detailed when they should be vague, etc.) it seems worth checking in with how our Dem pretenders to the throne respond, if for no other reason than to start hammering out those bad habits early.
Here, then, are the report cards (candidates, as usual, in alpha order). Mr. Totten was kind enough to collect responses from the two announced candidates who did not send us a press release. No 'F's handed out, but some serious improvement required on a couple of these… next time we'll hopefully get straight 'A's on the basics from everyone, so we can start moving into more nuanced, “advanced” critiques. Heh.
|
|
Response: “You have a bunch of people running for governor right now who have been in the same chamber, if not the same building, for an extended period of time and we've all had to work together… I would hope that adds to the civility of it.”…”I think for Brian it really is an interesting challenge—he's been the governor's wing guy for almost eight years, so if Brian is saying something needs to be repaired, he sure knows what it is,” said Bartlett. “It's a difficult positions that he finds himself in.” |
Grade: D What's with the analytical? This is time to make a statement – distinguish yourself from your ultimate opposition. Points for tying him to the Governor (enough to keep it out of “F” territory), but then it sounds as though you cast that as a positive? We'll assume that's just poor wording and not an endorsement, but geez… |
|
|
Response: “I think it'll be good to have so many competing visions is good for the state. As I go around the state, I hear from people that they like my track record as a leader and as someone who brings people together and gets results.” Markowitz said she's not sure that Dubie's socially conservative views will be a hindrance during the campaign, or much of an issue with voters. |
Grade: D- Okay, points for starting to talk yourself up, although the lack of transition is a bit jarring…but WTF?!?! Did she actually tell Totten that Dubie's number one liability – especially insofar as it intersects with gender issues – would not be an “issue with voters?!?!?” Holy crap!!! Why on EARTH would she want to give him a free pass on social issues of all things?!?! Where the hell's that whizbang new campaign manager?? Here's a few phrase ideas for next time: “out of step,” “out of the mainstream,” “extreme views” – something, for pity's sake. But not an issue? Ye gods, we've got some work to do.
|
|
|
Response: “…I look forward to running against Brian again. I am hearing from Vermonters that they want a change in direction, with a focus on Vermont's strengths – small businesses, hard working people, and a high quality of life – so that we can all do better, and not just those who are lucky enough to be doing well already. I want all Vermonters to have real opportunities to get ahead, and this is why I am running for Governor. It's ironic that Lt. Governor Dubie's focus will be on restoring economic opportunity and jobs for Vermont, when he has been part of the Administration that has failed for seven years to deliver on the promise of new jobs. Brian Dubie will bring more of the same. Vermonters are looking for something new. “ |
Grade: A Bases covered. Mentions key groups. Contrasts himself. Characterizes the Douglas administration and ties Dubie to it. Hits new vs. old theme. Extra points for reminding folks that he's beaten Dubie before. That wasn't so hard, right? This aint brain surgery. C'mon Susan, Deb… no reason we can't give A's all around next time. First and foremost it's about just not shooting yourself in the foot.
|
Deb Markowitz 
But we're expecting another couple hats in the Democratic primary ring, no? I dropped emails to likely candidates Peter Shumlin and Matt Dunne to give them the opportunity to be criticized as well… of course I didn't mention I was giving out grades, but I had to be fair to the previous three after all…
|
|
Response: “Vermonters will certainly have a real choice in November and I would welcome the opportunity to run against Brian. He is a nice person and committed to his family, but his views are more aligned with the national Republicans than with most Vermonters and he has been unwilling to be transparent with the voters. Brian will not be able to avoid these issues in a run for Governor. Vermonters are hungry for a new vision for the state of Vermont and the next Governor has the opportunity to bring the state into a new era. This election will determine if we have an administration that merely pays lip service to important issues, or one that brings together Vermonters with the experience and energy to deliver fiber to every home, create new economy jobs, move us into a leadership role in renewable energy, and tackle comprehensive healthcare reform. 2010 will be a very exciting year.“ |
Grade: UPDATE: The first response was apparently meant as conversational chat, while the real one went into my spam folder. Sorry, Matt. I should've known better. Another good one, touching the right themes broadly – and extra points for tying him to the national 'R's – something that Dubie will be more vulnerable to than Douglas was because of his views on abortion and gay rights.Here's hoping somebody starts trying to pin him down on issues such as prayer in school and the like.
|
|
|
Response: “Brian is a friend and I welcome him to the race. Should I run, I intend to wage a positive issue oriented campaign that articulates a new vision for Vermont after 8 years of plodding along with the Douglas/Dubie team. Brian has opossed my efforts to protect a Women's right to choose, pass marriage equality, a balanced and fair state budget, my Senate resolution urging congress to hold impeachment hearing against his friends Bush/Cheney, my climate change bill that Douglas vetoed even after Al Gore called it the best bill passed by any Legislature to date and much more. I look forward to articulating the clear differences between Shumlin's Vermont and his should I win the Democratic Nomination” |
Grade: A I kinda wanted to give this an A+ but I just hate it when politicians refer to themselves in the third person. New vs old, check. Self-promotion, check. And quite a laundry list – again characterizing the Douglas administration negatively (and with a range of hot button issues not only going back a few years, but with an eye to the fact that he was responding to an email from GMD no less) – and tying it all right back to his opponent. A different flavored 'A' than Racine's, but an 'A' nonetheless.
|
Peter Shumlin
Regardless of how I rate the candidates, I agree that Racine and Shumlin made the most of the time in front of the mike.
There was also an interesting and somewhat surprising point on WCAX tonight: since 1962, every time there has been a vacancy in the governorship, party control has changed. I think this year looks like an opportunity for the D’s.
I would take issue with the personal ownership Peter seems to claim on legislation that clearly MANY Vermonters participated in getting past the red pen of Douglas. Vermont legislative process requires a lot of spotlight being passed around, and I would suspect a governor Shumlin that wanted to work on a tan in the spotlight would get some serious kickback. I remember back to the “ooops I forgot to tell Shap” moments on the TV last session. Not sure we need a Maverick from either party.
Seriously this is good stuff. This is going to be like choosing between flavors of ice cream. I think Dunn and Shumlin had the best responses by far, but I’d love to see a wildcard : D
Lots of good angles throughout though, Dubie’s going to have 5 opponents for much of the race and doubt he’ll have much left next October.
This makes me excited for 2010.