At today’s meeting of the Vermont Democratic Party State Committee, Bill Sorrell’s petition for the committee’s endorsement failed to attain the required two-thirds of members present and voting.
More to follow later, but the gist is as follows:
The Committee had its bi-monthly meeting in Montpelier this morning, and its first order of business was endorsements. The vote against Sorrell’s endorsement followed the successful vote to endorse Congressman Peter Welch.
The State Committee’s endorsement process has been in place since 2006; this is the first time a sitting Democrat has not received the party’s endorsement.
The State Committee previously voted to endorse challenger T. J. Donnovan at its May 2012 meeting.
Bill Sorrell did not attend the meeting but he did send his campaign manager and an attorney from the Attorney General’s office to speak on his behalf.
Analysis and commentary to follow later. The Staff of GMD is currently at North Beach eating burgers and drinking beer/soda/etc.
Wait a minute–Sorrell sent an attorney from the AG’s office to lobby for him? What? We’re paying AG staff to work on political campaigns? Or is this yet another ‘oops’ by Sorrell? Well, it all came out OK. It would be nice if he gracefully resigned like Johnson in March of ’68. Or like Nixon (gracefully???) in ’75–how ’bout ’62: “You won’t have Bill Sorrell to kick around anymore.” You little Dems can actually do something right. GOOD FOR YOU! Now Herr Brock must be wondering: “Jeez, those sonsabitches did that to HIM? What the Hell are they going to do to ME?”
Sorrell didn’t bother to attend the state committee meeting – which was probably not the best strategy when there were people who were undecided about whether to commit to him as a candidate.
I wasn’t there, but I imagine that addressing people’s concerns directly, in person might have made a difference in the outcome of the vote. There are some things a surrogate simply cannot do for a candidate. I’m sure that being a no-show also supported the “phoning it in” narrative a bit more than was good for Sorrell.
There are probably not more than four voters over and above the “Democratic Operatives” who care what the Demcratic party does. Parties in Vermont are of little importance.
Sorrell participated in the Lyndonville Stars and Stripes parade on Saturday. TJ Donovan marched in the same parade. I doubt that TJ had to choose between two events when his vote came up. Sorrell, to be fair, was in a no-win situation thanks to scheduling beyond his control.
A strong campaign is about the choices you make. Sorrell chose not to get his paperwork in when he could have easily gotten a co-endorsement with TJ.
Sorrell chose not to call members of the state committee to ask for their votes.
Sorrell’s campaign manager should’ve been checking on the date for the committee meeting.
Don’t bother trying to run a Sorrell pity party: he set himself up for failure. He made his own bed.
NanuqFC
In a Time of Universal Deceit, TELLING the TRUTH Is a Revolutionary Act. ~ George Orwell
I was there this morning. The discussion covered a range of topics, many relevant to today’s discussion.
First is the question of the meaning of the State Committee endorsement. While at this meeting and the last (when TJ was endorsed) there were some who opined that the so-called endorsement is no more than a ratification of the proposition that the candidate is a bona fide Democrat, but others indicated that the vote can be taken to mean support for the candidate by the state party. The bylaws are intentionally ambiguous or silent on this point.
Second, the union issue was important. Many Democrats believe that we have an obligation to stand with the workers, and going to a nonunion shop even for valid personal reasons, was taken as either a slap in the face or a rookie error from someone who is far from a rookie.
Third, the union issue wasn’t the only issue. There were members of the State Committee who argued today that over his fifteen years as Attorney General Sorrell has not really reached out or established a connection with the state party.
Here’s a counterexample: The Committee was also considering an endorsement resolution for the reelection of Peter Welch. A few weeks ago I collected about a hundred signatures on Peter’s nominating petition, yet the other day he called me personally to ask for my support today. He called all fourteen county chairs, even though he knew he had our support. I didn’t hear of anyone getting a call from Bill Sorrell.
Finally, what does it mean for the election? It’s true that not many people know who gets endorsed by the state party, but this is the kind of thing that could increase the statewide visibility of the whole race. That publicity boost is likely to help Donovan, the less well-known candidate, particularly in the southern counties.