With 260 precincts out of 260 precincts reporting, Peter Shumlin won the unofficial vote tally by a 182 vote margin.

Peter Shumlin 18,239

Doug Racine 18,057

Deb Markowitz 17,579

Matt Dunne 15,100

Susan Bartlett 3,791

ANOTHER FINAL UPDATE

From the Times Argus: http://www.timesargus.com/arti…

12:08 p.m. – With 260 of Vermont’s 260 precincts reporting, including 73,059 votes, Peter Shumlin won the Democratic gubernatorial primary on the strength of late-reported southern Vermont votes. His margin of victory is 178 votes, with all towns and cities reporting. Deb Markowitz finished 390 votes behind Shumlin. To request a recount, the margin for victory must be within 2 percent, which is true in this race.

Peter Shumlin – 18,244 votes (25.0%)

Doug Racine – 18,066 votes (24.7%)

Deb Markowitz – 17,854 votes (24.4%)

Matt Dunne – 15,100 votes (20.7%)

Susan Bartlett – 3,795 votes (5.2%)

(Associated Press, Rutland Herald and Times Argus figures)

POSSIBLY THE FINAL UPDATE:

Per the Times Argus:

10:51 a.m. – With 257 of Vermont’s 260 precincts reporting, including 72,870 votes, Peter Shumlin has pulled back into the lead on the strength of late-reported southern Vermont votes. He now leads by 187 votes, with three towns yet to be included in the count. Deb Markowitz has also moved closer, to within 410 votes of Shumlin. To request a recount, the margin for victory must be within 2 percent, which is true in this race.

Peter Shumlin – 18,201 votes (25.0%)

Doug Racine – 18,014 votes (24.7%)

Deb Markowitz – 17,791 votes (24.4%)

Matt Dunne – 15,081 votes (20.7%)

Susan Bartlett – 3,783 votes (5.2%)

The Times Argus is also reporting that the three outstanding towns are Cabot, Guildhall, and Lemington. We have a previous report that Guildhall nets out to + 9 for Shumlin.

GMD expects Peter Shumlin will end the Election Day tally with the most votes..

And one would do well to remember that a recount is a strong possibility.

———————————————-

UPDATE: As the diary below suggested, the St. Albans Messenger is now reporting results from the Franklin County towns that bring Shumlin’s lead down to a mere 11 votes.

UPDATE 2: …and again from the comments, Mark Johnson has reported that Franklin County has now put Racine up by 55.

UPDATE 3: Via the Times Argus:

Doug Racine – 17,411 votes (25%)

Peter Shumlin – 17,336 votes (25%)

Deb Markowitz – 16,929 votes (24%)

Matt Dunne – 14,448 votes (21%)

Susan Bartlett – 3,616 votes (5%)

The Argus/Herald reports that the towns still out are Cabot, Canaan, Dover, East Haven, Enosburg, Granville, Guildhall, Hancock, Lemington, New Haven, Newfane, Plymouth, Reading, Shaftsbury, Tunbridge, Wells, Westfield, Weston, Whiting, Williamstown.

UPDATE4: From the comments:

NPR:

Doug Racine 17,803 25%  

Peter Shumlin 17,724 25%  

Deb Markowitz 17,174 24%  

Matt Dunne 14,899 21%  

Susan Bartlett 3,714 5%  

96% / 249 of 260 precincts reporting

Update 5: per VPR:

Doug Racine   18,066  25%  

Peter Shumlin 17,998 25%

Deb Markowitz 17,243 24%

Matt Dunne 15,271 21%

Susan Bartlett 3,966 5%

98% / 256 of 260 precincts reporting

How’d you sleep?

…Matt Dunne. From the Addison Independent (h/t jjem in the comments):

we think Dunne’s unique background as a community developer for Google, his leadership under President Clinton with Ameri-Corps, his family connection to Vermont’s dairy farming will provide a new kind of leadership style that will forge alliances – not for political purposes (a benefit of not being part of the current political leadership) – but for the betterment of the state. Finally, of all the candidates, his vision and intuition perfectly match the times.

A good pickup for Dunne in a county that will provide a lot of Democratic ballots.

Elections – Gubernatorial Primary: It’s a ridiculously obvious contradiction all too common among many on the left. On the one hand, some activists decry the fact that money is so important in politics. Fair enough. It certainly sucks. Then in the next breath, they’ll denounce any who discuss candidates’ fundraising as significant.

Money is either a big deal in elections or it isn’t, and if it is, then the fundraising of individual candidates matters. Indeed, the bigger a deal money in politics is, the more it logically follows that fundraising does matter. Cause -> effect. 1+1=2.

There’s been enough time since the financial filings to assess the impact of those reports on the race, and that impact has clearly been significant.  

Markowitz performed to her historically high expectations. Dunne and Shumlin performed above most expectations. In fact, if one factors out the significant contribution Shumlin made to his own campaign, Dunne actually came in a hair’s breath above Shumlin, quietly surprising many (it shouldn’t have). Shumlin put his own money where his mouth is demonstrating he is in this to win, and the endorsements he has accumulated in recent weeks demonstrate some serious campaign momentum.

And then there’s the Racine anomaly. Despite a collection of the biggest endorsements, Racine’s fundraising was in the neighborhood of Susan Bartlett’s rather than his more competitive opponents. The result? By all appearances, this race – rather than being a 2 way showdown, or even a 3 way battle – is now a full blown 4-way contest, and will likely stay that way until this month’s primary. This is as much due to the upward momentum of the Shumlin and Dunne campaigns as the questions of confidence that have resurfaced about Racine as a result of the filing.

Consider: Peter Shumlin has gone up with a TV ad. So has Markowitz. Word is that Dunne will join in soon. It’s a cold hard fact that these three campaigns are the only three campaigns that can afford to run any ads, and that fact may not be lost on many of the savvier primary voters. (Big correction: Turns out this is quite wrong, as Racine will be going up with a TV ad soon. Whatever the content of the advertisement, running one at all could prove a sign to voters that the money has started flowing again…)

None of which is to suggest that Racine is going away before the 24th, but his hopes of keeping the race between him and Markowitz are a thing of the past. For many who have been watching these things for years, the poor financial showing brought back all the old concerns about Racine that he had managed to consign to the past after his impressive initial filing last year; that he’s not putting in the work that needs to be done to beat the Republicans. Since last summer, around $1.2 million dollars has already been circulated to defeat Brian Dubie. That’s an amazing figure. Racine – who had looked like the front runner to many, and who had captured all the early, major organizational endorsements, could barely collect 8 or 9 percent of that pot for his own efforts.

Perhaps more dangerous for Racine, though, are the reminiscences of his campaign against Jim Douglas. Back then, Racine had a tight group of advisors who were so devoted to him at a personal level that they seemed to have a hard time acknowledging troubling news, let alone adapting to it. Flash forward to the present, and folks close to the Racine operation have suggested that this campaign’s inner circle actually expected their fundraising would be in the neighborhood of their competitors. Worse still, there are frustrated mutterings that they haven’t taken the low filing particularly seriously as a campaign issue, even though it obviously is. Such counter intuitive chatter is eerily familiar, and that hasn’t sat well with a lot of observers.

But the fact remains, Racine commands great loyalty within the progressive wing of the party. Also, he is immensely popular in his native Chittenden County across the Democratic ideological spectrum, where the highest percentage of primary votes will come from – an even higher percentage than will turn out for the general election.

And those numerous organizational endorsements (more than all his rivals combined) – what will their effect be? The AFL endorsement was only a boost for a news cycle, which has come and gone. The VLCV has maintained a sophisticated online persuasion effort that is doubtlessly feeding valuable information into voter ID lists. Will the VSEA and the Vermont NEA be able to turn out members for GOTV efforts? Yes. Will it be as many as the Racine campaign needs? No doubt these organizations were shaken by the bad buzz around the financial filing and will not relish the prospect of seeing their candidate come in fourth, so the motivation to avoid that scenario will be high. Expect some shaking of the bushes among the endorsing groups memberships.

And a 4-way race means that the winner is going to persevere with very, very few votes. It’s going to largely come down to voter ID lists (in which campaigns have identified their supporters in advance of the election) and get out the vote (GOTV) efforts, in which they work to guarantee that all those supporters actually show up and vote.

Markowitz has to be considered the leader in the post-campaign-finance-report world, but the significance of that lead is dramatically diminished in a 4 way race. In many ways, Team Deb would’ve been better off if Racine had stayed dominant and the whole affair had come down to two. Now, even with the the Markowitz financial juggernaut, anything is possible. In an election where 15,000 (or fewer) voters could e enough to win, one can still draw up mathmatical scenarios where Susan Bartlett comes out ahead. It’s clear that Markowitz Campaign Manager Tencher knows this and is taking nothing for granted.

In this environment, the sophistication and effectiveness of the early vote operations currently underway could well provide the margin of victory.

Mojometers follow, but without any further individualized analysis. Instead, there will be lists of endorsing organizations.

And in these last few weeks, given the depletion of the Democratic candidate’s coffers, it’s critical that you check out and join the Facebook group 1000 VERMONTERS FOR CHANGE as well as spread the word among your friends online. Click here for details!!

Deb Markowitz. Organizational endorsements: Emily’s List

Matt Dunne. Organizational endorsements: 21st Century Democrats

Peter Shumlin. Organizational endorsements: Teamsters Local 597, VT Freedom to Marry PAC

Doug Racine. Organizational endorsements: Vermont National Education Association, Vermont League of Conservation Voters, Vermont AFL-CIO, Vermont Building and Construction Trades Council, Vermont State Employees Association

Susan Bartlett. Organizational endorsements: none

Elections – Secretary of State: A bizarre war of words has erupted in the Democratic Primary for Secretary of State between candidate Charles Merriman of Middlesex and non-candidate Jake Perkinson, Chittenden County Democratic Party Chair, and supporter of Merriman’s opponent, former Chittenden Senator Jim Condos.

It began with Merriman’s appearence on the Mark Johnson Show last week, where he made the following, almost inconceivable statement as a candidate in the Democratic Party primary, looking for Democratic Primary votes:

“I should have run as an independent. You know it was… um… I thought about

it and frankly I ran as a Democrat because I figured I had a better chance of

winning than if I ran as an independent. If I get in, I’ll run as an independent next time.”

What’s followed is a bit of a Democratic Party tempest. First came an email signed by Perkinson and Middlesex Town Dem Chair Taryn Moran, that included the quote, the audio clip, and the following:

As both a Middlesex (Charlie’s home) Town Democratic Chair and a Chittenden County Democratic Chair, we were shocked when we heard this, and find it extremely disappointing that he is only using the Democratic Party to satisfy his personal ambition. Then after the election, should he win; he would turn around and abandon the Democratic Party. He wants to use all of our hard work and our good name to win, but he won’t work to build the party.

We hope you know that you will not get that type of attitude out of Jim Condos.[snip] …it is incredibly expensive to run statewide, if you could make a donation of $25, $50, $100, or more to Jim’s campaign it would go a long way to show the voters that Jim Condos is the best candidate in this race.  

Merriman – and one other County Chair – immediately pushed back. More on the flip.

Next was this email that went out to Democratic circles from the Windham County Chair:

To whom it may concern,

I cannot speak to the content or context of Mr. Merriman’s interview. I am however, very surprised that a County Chair or even a Town Chair would publicly do a fundraising campaign for any Candidate in a Statewide Primary race. I am sure we all have our favorites in many races, but this is a very slippery slope in which you descend. One that I can assure you Windham County will not follow. I can only assume that your individual committee’s have approved this letter, as you have signed on their behalf.

Windham County Democratic Chairman

Lamont Barnett

Then came this clearly angry email to the media from Merriman:

Dear Newspaperpeople:

I am forwarding you an email which went out today from two Democratic Party Chairs.  The email criticizes me as a false Democrat, based on my unwavering belief that the office of the secretary of state must be — above all else — nonpartisan. The email seeks support for Jim Condos.

Unwittingly, the email authors have done me a service.  They have perfectly described a major difference between Jim and me. Jim is, first and foremost, a partisan Democrat. When the issue is close, and the choice is between reading and applying the law (something I, as an attorney, am competent to do and Jim is not), or siding with the policy goals of the Democratic majority in the Legislature, Jim will side with the policy goals of the Democratic majority in the Legislature.

That is not the way the office should be run.  To their credit, most members of the Democratic party with whom I have spoken eschew partisanship in the office, even if it is “their” partisan.  They understand that the office must be, above all else, nonpartisan.

Jim is a Democrat who favors first the party. I am a democrat who favors first the rule of law.  In light of this stark difference between the two of us, I am hopeful your paper will endorse my candidacy for Secretary of State.

Best regards,

Charlie

Charles L. Merriman

Candidate,

Vermont Secretary of State

Finally, there was an email from Condos to the media. Rather than distance himself from a burgeoning internal fracas, Condos invited the media to involve him more deeply, and again forwarded the same clip, which suggests a closed loop with Perkinson and Moran from the outset:

I would be more than happy to speak with you on this email from Mr Merriman if you would like to contact me…

Also, Mr Merriman conveniently deleted an audio of his comments on the Mark Johnson show – it is attached.

JIM

There is certainly a lot to consider here. The question of “what on Earth was Merriman thinking” during his Mark Johnson Show comments tends to get trumped by the question of “what on Earth was Merriman thinking” went he sent that email, which did him no favors. One also wonders why Condos and his supporters would let loose in such an aggressive – and to many, off-putting manner – in a primary that, by all current indications, has already likely become his to lose? And what were Moran and Perkinson thinking in signing their titles on such an aggressive primary advocacy letter, invoking their respective offices and bringing their full committees into the affair in the process?

Strange is the thinking in the political bubble, sometimes.

Elections – Governor: The Jim Douglas-Jason Gibbs strategy of throwing everything they can think of at Deb Markowitz (on Brian Dubie’s behalf) in order to generate an incompetence narrative flailed a bit yesterday. From a Gibbs press release (that, again, made no mention of his actual opponents in the Secretary of State election):

DUXBURY – Jason Gibbs today sent a letter to incumbent Secretary of State Deb Markowitz urging her to verify the accuracy of information available to Vermonters serving in all of the uniformed services.

In the letter, Gibbs notes that Governor Jim Douglas, in a satellite interview from Afghanistan on Saturday, noted that the date being provided to troops when he was in Baghdad, Iraq was still the old date of September 14th, not the new date of August 24th.

This raises significant concerns about the accuracy of information being provided at military posts around the globe, Gibbs said.

Not only is this return to the typical GOP strategy of using troops as political hockey pucks rather nauseating, it turns out to be an epic (and rather embarrassing) misfire. When the change in the primary date was made, the Secretary of State followed procedures properly, working with the Federal Voting Assistance Program. According to insiders, the breakdown in communication was the responsibility of the Voting Assistance Officer overseas.

So instead of directing their (manufactured) shock and outrage at candidate Markowitz, Douglas and Gibbs would be better served by taking aim at Vermont’s Adjutant General – Michael Dubie. That would be Brian’s brother.

Oops.

On the upside, this episode may finally put an end to Markowitz’s record of warm & fuzzy characterizations of Jim Douglas. According to reports, in some public appearances earlier in her term, she went so far as to refer to him as a “mentor.”

Elections – Governor: As much as the bottom line, candidates tomorrow will be playing to the expectations of observers on their fundraising reports. An example of that can be heard in Bob Kinzel’s VPR report this morning on Susan Bartlett’s fundraising. No one doubts that Bartlett will be last in terms of dollars raised, but by playing down that expectation as much as she does, any respectable bottom line could be seen as a win.

So what are the candidates likely to report? No one outside of the campaigns themselves can say for sure, but here are some educated guesses of what we may expect to see:

Markowitz will certainly lead the pack, and may potentially crack three quarters of a million dollars. A showing in the low $700k range should surprise no one (Publisher’s note: Insiders report that this number is high, and that the hyperventilating hubbub about Markowitz’s haul, which some have suggested will exceed even $800k, is unrealistic. Look for something more in the $500-$600k range).

Racine will come in second, but won’t have reached half a million. Expect to see Racine’s total raised to be near $400,000.

The bronze medal will be interesting to see. Dunne will have a win if he comes in raising more than a quarter million dollars which will surprise some observers. Peter Shumlin, of course, is legendary for his fundraising prowess, and he has been able to tap the national LGBTQ community (including, reportedly, $15k from a single Boston event). Given the late start, some observers project him to report in the $300,000 range, but he and Dunne may well be closer than expected. A Dunne third place showing – although unlikely – would be a big blow for Shumlin. It could turn out that way, but it looks pretty unlikely. In the case of Susan Bartlett, the question will be whether she has achieved 6 figures, as that seems to be the bar she is setting for herself in the media.

Cash on hand? Harder to say. It’s the spending season and Markowitz has staffed up more than her competitors, while Shumlin has already begun TV ad buys. Who has been spending money on internal polling and who hasn’t? Cash on hand is likely the more significant number for the next few weeks, and those numbers will be anybody’s guess.

But the combined reports will show that, since the start of this process a year and a half back, the five Democrats will have raised in the neighborhood of $1.75 million dollars – all for a Vermont primary – and that right there tells us what a different electoral world we now live in.

It also tells us there’s a lot of interest and money out there to return the Governorship to Democratic hands.

Elections – Governor: A big, big week for the candidates for Governor to say the least.

Bob Kinzel had an excellent assessment of the significance of the upcoming financial filing last week on VPR, and it’s definitely worth checking out. What he did not cover, however, is how the early vote process fits into it all. In any well-run campaign, the goal is to stay in control of as many variables as possible, and nothing is more quantum than turnout on election day. Identifying supportive voters and making sure they get to the polls is much easier if you have a robust field operation that works the early vote process – as opposed to depending exclusively on get-out-the-vote (GOTV) work on election eve – and working early vote well is a comprehensive, resource-intensive task. Making sure your supporters request an early ballot, making sure the request was received and returned, sending persuasion communiques to everyone in a town that makes such a request, even if they aren’t on your list – doing all of this well takes a commitment that not all campaigns will choose to make, even if it clearly does put the elusive turnout variable under far greater direct control.

Between the two benchmarks of early vote and financial filings, we’ll know far more about the respective campaign strategies and trajectories by the end of the week, and the kind of analysis we do with our mojometers becomes far less speculative. Until then, expect to be pummelled with last minute donation requests in order to pump those reports up as far as possible.

Here, then, are the last mojometers before that picture comes more clearly into focus (all of which run fairly high, as the campaigns each work to deliver their “A” game on such a uniquely important week), including some thoughts on what to look for in the filings as well as what to expect in the coming weeks.

Peter Shumlin. Shumlin has had a big last couple weeks. He scored a major endorsement from the Teamsters Local (breaking up Racine’s labor monopoly) and got a lot of press for going up with the primary’s first TV ad. Endorsements like the Teamsters are important for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that they can act as a de facto field operation. Unions and other constituency groups don’t simply pass their endorsements on to rank and file, they become invested in turning out that rank and file, as a win for the candidate enhances their own clout and credibility. As such, these endorsing groups can help with field operations like GOTV and early vote (and as of Monday, Shumlin has added the Freedom to Marry Action Committee to what is now a list of endorsing organizations – an endorsement which will likely be more significant than the Teamsters in the Democratic Primary). This is good for Shumlin, as it’s not clear how much of a field operation he’s been able to support on his own.

The TV ad has, as ads often do, generated a lot of “earned media” coverage from reporters, creating an impact above and beyond the buy itself. As such, Shumlin’s mojo goes decidedly up for the week. Nevertheless, the timing raises eyebrows. Coming so close before the filing deadline generates inevitable questions about his finances, and whether or not the Shumlin campaign has begun its sprint for the home stretch relatively early in part to drive up last minute contributions to avoid an underwhelming cash on hand report. Time will tell. Still, momentum feeds momentum and Shumlin has given his operation a serious adrenilin injection in recent days.

The outgoing Senate President Pro Tempore won’t have the best field operation, won’t have the most ad buys, and likely won’t get the most earned media in the final days. What he’s going to need to do is be second best at everything in order to cobble together the votes when the polls close.

Deb Markowitz. Markowitz, like all the others, has sent out early vote messages to supporters. Unlike the others, though, field seems to be a relative afterthought. Despite the fact that Campaign Manager Paul Tencher talked up field and grassroots organizing in the above-linked Kinzel report (including touting the recent hiring of a field staff), the fact is that up to this point, the Markowitz campaign has been all about fundraising, with most of its human resources focused on bringing in more resources.

This means that Markowitz’s focus will be media buys rather than field work, so we can expect to see some major ad buys from her campaign soon. This will dovetail with the Markowitz’s campaign messaging up to this point, which has been primarily focused on building up the Secretary of State as a positive personality, and getting into issue specifics more slowly and tenuously than her rivals.

Winning with paid media is certainly a modus operandi for modern campaigns, but in a small state like Vermont it comes with risks. The winner may only receive 15,000 votes after all, so while the more field-focused operation will be concerned with banking those votes in advance (and driving up the turnout overall in the process), Markowitz will focus more on working hearts and minds leading up to the big day. Her financials will be particularly interesting to watch for this reason. If she reports as much money on hand as many expect, that cash combined with a smaller voter turnout could easily equal a Markowitz victory in August. Good mojo but not great because of vulnerability in the ground game in a race that could well turn on the ground game.

Doug Racine. Racine has inherited tremendous field resources through his multiple endorsements. The Vermont League of Conservation Voters and the Vermont NEA in particular will do early vote work on his behalf, and the effect of the stream of endorsements (along with the hiring of national election bigshot Joe Trippi) on his campaign’s buzz has been tremendous, raising confidence in his potential prowess as the possible Democratic Party standard bearer among uncertain primary voters. He does continue to be dogged with rumors that he isn’t raising money, but it’s difficult to judge those rumors. Earlier in the year, it seemed likely that those rumors were unfounded (possibly originating with opponents?), as their emergence would be followed by campaign expenditures such as new campaign hires (he must be paying them something, no?). Still, who knows?

But truthfully, even if he is broke (which, again, is unlikely), the support from his constituency groups along with a savvy, field-focused campaign means he could easily win this regardless, and refill his coffers after the fact. A big turnout equals more early voters, and could equal a Racine victory. Good mojo but not the greatest because of the fundraising buzz.

Matt Dunne. Dunne is going to have a good week, as he is likely going to surprise many with his fundraising. If he comes in with a better filing than Shumlin, it will surprise enough observers to give him some good momentum in the media. With his not insignificant (and recently trumpeted) support from many in the business community, Dunne will be able to compete strongly on resources and message.

From all appearences, Dunne seems to have the most comprehensive and vibrant field operation. Whether it can compete with Racine’s largely outsourced one is the question, but good buzz from a filing will help across the board by generating coverage and boosting his still-lower name recognition.

If Dunne has a lot of money on hand, don’t be surprised to see some strategic TV buys, as we saw in his Lieutenant Governor primary against John Tracy (and an excellent ad it was, targeted right to the VPR crowd with its Willem Lange voiceover). Strong mojo, and again, the higher the turnout, the better the chance of a Dunne victory.

Susan Bartlett. If Racine has a constituency-group-driven field machine and Dunne has a sophisticated internal field machine, Bartlett gets the award for having the most field-dominated operation, putting her on the opposite end of the spectrum from Markowitz. No one is expecting Bartlett to have a lot of cash on hand, and her campaign is playing down any such expectations. Instead, her operation is proudly announcing its focus on the ground game, even going so far as to sell that reliance as a messaging virtue.

Field is great, but name recognition and broad support are still tough hurdles for Bartlett, so expect a few Hail Mary campaign passes in the coming weeks. A mysteriously unrevealing press release announcing a press conference for today (Tuesday) could well signal one, and its enigmatic lack of detail clearly teases those who may be expecting her to drop out of the race entirely (unlikely, as another email to supporters went out pushing early vote).

It’s difficult to judge the mojo of the Bartlett campaign, so we’ll make it a wash – but as a more fiscally conservative, straight-talk style candidate, she very much fits the profile of a candidate who will get a lot of love from newspaper endorsement boards. If she can stay afloat a while longer, it seems likely she’ll pile up her share of these highly influential endorsements.