The Markowitz campaign reports:
BURLINGTON-Former Vermont Governor Madeleine Kunin will endorse Secretary of State Deb Markowitz on the same day (TODAY) EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest financial resource for women candidates, will announce their support for Markowitz’s gubernatorial bid. Both endorsements come nearly a year before the election and will mean a major resource boost for the campaign. It is also the first EMILY’s List endorsement of any gubernatorial candidate in Vermont history.
Big news/game changer, or old news/status quo? Maybe both? Consider this a gubernatorial open thread.
UPDATE: How does the other Democratic pro-choice woman in the race feel about her unequivocal dismissal by EL finally becoming official? Here’s the statement from Susan Bartlett’s campaign:
“I believe this race is going to be decided by Vermonters, not by big out-of-state special interest groups. Vermont voters will be more influenced by ideas and experienced leadership than by out-of-state donations by single-issue groups.
And I know the statement I am about to make will raise some serious hackles, but
In a time when equality is what we are all about,
Why is a group that singles out a candidate who may be 4th or 5th best qualified, JUST because of a distinction between x/x and x/y chromosomes even tolerated in this state? Especially in a pre primary world where there is a very highly qualified legislator still in the soup??
I know I go to the extreme with this example, but if Candidate x showed up in a white hat and received the endorsement of the Grand Knights, holy hell would break out. Or if one church decided to finance someone because they had a position on same sex marriage or the right to choose?? Who would not cry FOUL?? Maybe I live in a dream world where we seem to have a fence to protect us from that at the Mass border…?
And that is really the minor point here. I guess I am really much more concerned that an out of state group is going to attempt to sway our votes with cash. Isn’t that what Jack McMullen was all about?? Well, and the fact that he was actually from Mass, but….
This is admittedly a knee jerk reaction… sorry, but for the sake of Vermont, I would be really pleased if Deb said, “thanks for the Endorsement, we can do just fine without your money”.
It’s a just say NO sorta thing… So let the bashing begin.. sorry
1. Bartlett=sour grapes. Non-viable sour grapes at that.
2. Matt Dunne’s blogger should read about Emily’s List’s fight against Bart Stupak. Oh and their endorsement of Martha Coakley (success!)
3. I won’t even respond to the nutto that thinks EMILY’s List is discriminatory.
4. Haven’t we had enough of Jim Douglas poo pooing this state? Why would you not want national interest in a (hopefully) Red to Blue governor’s race. All you other candidate’s asking the DGA to stay away too?
5. Name an issue you do not know where Deb stands. I bet it is on her website.
6. Four legislators and Deb. Who is the establishment again?
The fact that I am a woman does not tip my support toward either of the female candidates. In fact, I believe I will be supporting Doug Racine unless he drowns a bald eagle, buys a Hummer, or grinds-up grandma for catfood.
That being said, I think it is legitimate for underrepresented populations like women and ethnic minorities to organize and endorse for the purpose of addressing that underrepresentation. Underrepresentation is as valid an issue as any other.
I agree with that. I suspect all five of the primary candidates do also. That’s not really the overriding consideration in any candidate’s pursuit of resources like this. Helping to influence voters might be a tangential benefit, but the point is to help the campaign get its message out to voters, not Emily’s List’s message.
Matthew is correct. If the folks at Emily’s list thought the race for Governor began and ended with the five solid Democrats in the primary, they would likely be looking elsewhere with their resources. Unfortunately, the election does begin and end with those five candidates in the Democratic primary. Emily’s list is looking at November: how to get there, how to win then.
I don’t know if anything like that will happen. I don’t even who that person is. I really don’t even know what that means, so I’ll withhold judgment on whether the Pastor is a babe.
—
Candidate who don’t receive a particular group’s endorsement play down its significance and those that do, play it up.
For the past eight years, Vermont has had an administration inimical to equality while being divisive to all and friendly to the enimies of all types of social justice. Emily’s list is obviously gearing up for the anti-woman’s right to health care candidate – Brian Dubie – and they’ve picked the candidate they think will be the best person to beat him.
After the past eight years, Emily’s list obviously does not want want to wait until after the primary. Waiting for the primary gives them, effectively, only a few business days to put their resources to work before the November election. It’s too late to have much of an impact at that point – at least no where near the impact on behalf of the campaign that affords them a genuine impact in November. Their money goes a lot further the summer before the election than it does in the last few days of our truncated process.
Emily’s list is helping to put Deb Markowitz ahead of Brian Dubie. This is not an “anti-[insert another Democrat here] choice. This is a practical realization that Deb Markowitz is a solid candidate to win the primary and she is a candidate who needs support starting now now to prepare to beat Brian Dubie, and put an end to eight years of GOP incompetence at the helm of Vermont government.
We all wish our candidate could receive this. Those of us without a choice would probably prefer this not happen until later. Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact that today was a really good day for chalking up more resources available in November to defeat the remnants of the Douglas/Dubie administration.
I am not endorsing anyone in the Democratic primary yet.
Fewer than half the states (23) have EVER had a female governor, even for as little as a week. And I believe there are now 5 female governors out of 50 (that would be 10 percent, for those of you who are math-impaired), with the resignations of Alaska’s Palin (bored with governing), Kansas’s Kathleen Sebelius (Secretary of HHS), and Arizona’s Janet Napolitano (Secretary of Homeland Security).
Women were ‘granted’ the right to vote 131 years AFTER men took that right for granted.
The right to control their own bodies in reproductive decisions was recognized a mere 37 years ago.
And who, dear gentlemen, is it that has tried to remove access to reproductive choice for women through insurance regulations? What’s that? Bart Stupid? Oh, StupPAK. And he’s a Republican, right? No? A Democrat??
So why, you ask, would Emily’s List ever pick a governor’s race to help funnel money to a woman candidate? Maybe all the good ol’ boy networks aren’t funneling money to Dubie’s campaign. Maybe the religious brotherhoods aren’t backing their studs in the race by ponying up some cash. And why now? Well, the group isn’t named for a woman, it’s named Early Money Is Like Yeast (it makes the dough rise). It’s all about using their money to make more money for the campaign.
Maybe women still have some catching up to do to achieve financial and political equality. After all, it became clear just recently that we’re so equal, our rights are being threatened by our supposed allies.
NanuqFC
You can always rely on a society of equals taking it out on the women. ~ Alan Sillitoe
but I don’t like watching any bigger money, of any kind, come into our electoral process. Vermont politics should be as cheap as possible.
But then, I’m over here in Copenhagen and not exactly winning, so maybe don’t listen to me.
I don’t believe that this race will be decided by Vermonters, at least not entirely. I do think that this is wrong. People were rightly offended when McMullen came swanning into the state with a bagful of cash.
The law should forbid candidates from taking money that originates anywhere outside their voting districts. I have no right to influence a gubernatorial election in California or Nebraska, and citizens of other states have no right to influence the governor’s race (or any other in-state race) here. Donating money is more effective than casting your vote, if you can donate enough.
I’d like to see the major parties destroyed as money-funneling machines and re-established as ideological centers. The only thing you can say for sure about a Democrat or Republican these days is where their money came from.
If Emily’s List wanted to raise money among Vermonters to promote Markowitz I’d be fine with that.
but actually find some really good perspective on the issue. I continue to think that floating a boatload of money into the campaign of ONE candidate just based upon gender is wrong.
To have Kunin simply state we need another woman governor also reflects a strange perspective.
As to the sour grapes, etc. I took the time to check out the website of Deb for Vermont, and it is heavy on words but really fairly weak on content. “I want good jobs,healthcare, environment and cows” doesnt mean much to me. I know her claim of finding great savings in the public records transfer is causing some problems. Word is that the internal politics and employee satisfaction with her management style are some pretty significant red flags.
I want a governor who knows how to govern. Someone who has seen a lot of public and private function and can effectively meld the two together. The Douglas approach of slash and burn has gutted government, which was the plan I suspect. The next governor will need to be a creative rebuilder of support and services.
This discussion seemed to be heading for naming names and I have to say at this point that Racine seems to fit the bill at this moment for me. Things could change??? Who knows!!! His Youcanquoteme on Sunday was short on splash and flash, but content and basic integrity are apparent… Not really looking for a movie star.