Political Suicide, or Minor Heretic calls the election in May

It’s official: The Vermont Democratic Party would rather see Republican Governor Jim Douglas reelected than give Progressive Anthony Pollina a chance at the office. Democratic Speaker of the House Gaye Symington has declared her candidacy.

Sitting governors in Vermont are more likely to be abducted by aliens after being hit by lightning while redeeming a winning lottery ticket than to be defeated in an election. Nevertheless, Pollina had at least a forlorn hope as long as he was in the field solus. With the entry of Symington, the left hand side of the electorate will be split. Jim Douglas can recite his empty mantra of “affordability” till November and, unless filmed in a motel room doing something unnatural, will stroll away with the election. He can start working on his victory speech now.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall at the relevant top level Vt. Democratic Party strategy session. What were they thinking? Perhaps they saw the gubernatorial race as a lost cause anyway, so why not pitch the retiring Symington onto the upraised spears? It would keep Pollina and the Progressives from getting too major league, and prep Symington on the statewide stage for when Douglas retires. Are they actually deluded enough to think that she has a chance in a left-split race? Is it a misguided attempt at retaining party credibility merely by having someone in the running? Do they simply prefer an enemy to the right in the Governor’s office rather than an enemy to the left? Is their reasoning loony beyond my powers of imagination? Are they just dim?

I should note that I have nothing against Gaye Symington per se. Anyone who seeks the leadership of the junior high school and sausage mill that is the Vermont House has my wary admiration. I am sure she would make a better governor than Jim Douglas, but that is damning with faint praise. One of my mother’s aging pet poodles would be an improvement. They occasionally do something useful, such as chasing squirrels off the feeder.

Anthony Pollina, although a long shot, is interesting. (Full disclosure: Your Minor Heretic sent him some grocery money) He rings all the right bells: Single payer health care, serious investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy, holding the owners of our nuclear plant accountable, and supporting the local farm economy. These are often contentious issues, so I am not sanguine about his chances against a man who has spent his career successfully not offending people.

But I digress…

The point is, the Vermont Democratic Party and the Vermont Progressive Party have to start cooperating, unless they want to have Jim Douglas vetoing everything intelligent and useful for the next six-plus years. That means having a summit every two years and deciding which party gets a crack at the big office. In other countries political parties make deals and alliances all the time. The Democrats have to give up two-party thinking and the Progressives have to get a little political dirt on their pure white consciences.

Instant runoff voting (IRV), where voters get to rank candidates according to preference, would solve the left-split problem. Of course, it would guarantee a non-Republican governor for the foreseeable future and put the Progressives on an even footing with the Democrats, so good luck with passing that.

In the meantime, I am preparing for another two years without a statewide health insurance program, without assurance that Entergy will clean up its nuclear waste, and without a realistic energy policy. I am gritting my teeth and readying myself for two more legislative sessions of vetoes and anemic compromises accompanied by the dull murmur of Douglas’s press conferences. We don’t have time for this kind of screwing around, but Symington and the Democrats have condemned us to it.

Congratulations, Governor.

Comments

[Ben Scotch]

We have a new standard in Vermont for judging when a pot is calling a kettle black, or to say it in Hungarian, without reference to color, "Bagoly mondja verébnek, hogy nagyfülű (The owl tells the sparrow that it has big ears)."

It is one thing for traditional Democrats to complain that Anthony is a spoiler--a tautology, and not a clever one. "I don't like Anthony" would be more honest. It is equally inappropriate for Pollina boosters to complain that Gaye Symington is the spoiler. The word chutzpah comes readily to mind--and that ain't Hungarian.

As long as we don't have runoff voting, third parties will always "change the dynamic" of the race, to quote Pollina's comment on VPR, referring to Symington's entry into the race. And Anthony and Mr. Heretic are correct that with the left-of-center split, Douglas will be the beneficiary.

But outrage at the Dems' running a candidate? Really, Mr. Owl, clip your ears down to sparrow size, or hold your peace. Gaye Symington is as bright and able a candidate as has come into public life in a very long time. She will be a far more able governor than Anthony Pollina, who has never had to forge a coalition in the General Assembly or any other deliberative body.

A good friend delivering Anthony lit at last Saturday's Farmer's Market in Montpelier looked at my Symington button ("Gay Won't Veto Vermont") and replied, "But she'll compromise Vermont"--an argument I heard coming back at me from Pollina on VPR yesterday and apparently part of the Anthony mantra.

The message, deconstructed, is that "Gaye is really not one of us. We don't compromise our ideals."

Anyone who has followed Gaye's 12 years in the House knows that she doesn't compromise hers either. Dig half an inch into examples of her "compromises" and you will see a person very able at the perhaps icky business of trying to get the very best legislation through a diligent but often captious House--no small feat.

Gaye came to Montpelier as an education funding wonk and did well by the State under any standard of historical judgment. She waded into all the issues before the House and added much experience (some learned the hard way) to her intelligence and sangfroid. She earned respect on all sides of the aisle, but never as a "compromiser" in the Neville Chamberlain sense of the word, which is the sense the Pollina campaign not so subtly attaches to her as an overseer of the legislative process.

Anthony has shown admirable devotion to organizing and advocacy for a long time. I think it's regrettable that he, unlike Bernie, did not choose to run for elective office at the local level, to grow and learn, before running for higher office.

Is that legally necessary? Hell, no--no more than it is necessary to support an independent candidate because he's independent at a time when "the establishment" is at a nadir (get the homophone?) and Congress is about as popular as the current occupant of the White House. To call Gaye Symington a sentinal of the "old politics" or to hail Anthony as the advanced guard of "change" is to sloganize the discourse.

Vermont will be hiring a governor in November. Neither Mr. Heretic nor I have the right to say who the spoiler is. But we do have the right to compare the candidates' résumés and agendas. Anthony doesn't come close to Gaye on the former, nor is agenda wiser or more likely to come to pass.

Mr. Heretic writes, "Are they [VT Dems] actually deluded enough to think that she [Symington] has a chance in a left-split race? Is it a misguided attempt at retaining party credibility merely by having someone in the running? Do they simply prefer an enemy to the right in the Governor’s office rather than an enemy to the left? Is their reasoning loony beyond my powers of imagination? Are they just dim?"

Loony? Dim?

Mr. Heretic should check out Rules 3 and 4 for postings. Rule 3 says, "Statements such as '(Insert name of politician) is a $#@&*@ moron' may be emotionally satisfying, but do not add to the interplay of ideas." Rule 4 wisely points out, “You don’t know what you are talking about” by itself doesn’t add much either."

We might add Rule 5: "Hold the chutzpah."

Gaye Symington is visionary and experienced. She has my support, my vote, and as much of my time as I can give in this vitally important election.

[Heretic]

Ben Scotch, you make many good points, but not all of them apply to my essay.

First, as I state clearly, I have no objection to Symington in the abstract. If she were the sole opposition candidate, I would cheerfully support her. I am sure she would outshine Douglas as the sun outshines a distant nebula.

You will notice if you reread my essay that I expressed admiration of her willingness to be the ringmaster of a political zoo. I did not write anything about "compromise" or "old politics." I did not compare their resumes. I even took Progressives to task for clinging to political purity. Please do not put words in my processor.

Second, the concept of a spoiler is not so straightforward in this case. If Pollina had entered the race at this point with Symington already in it for some months I would have bemoaned the strategic ineptitude of Pollina and the Progressives. Neither Pollina nor Symington is a spoiler, but together they are spoiled. My point was that one opposition candidate had barely a chance against Governor Douglas. Two opposition candidates have essentially none.

As for the use of "loony" and "dim", 1) The Minor Heretic reserves the right of invective, 2) The invective was not directed at a commenter, and 3) My use of hyperbolic adjectives expresses my absolute gobsmacked incomprehension of the thought processes within the Democratic Party. Questioning the sanity or reasoning powers of those who repeat and compound folly is not out of line.

Anybody who has watched three presentable Democrats hurl themselves at Douglas like dandelion fluff against a concrete wall realizes that the odds are bad enough for one candidate at a time. The introduction of a third candidate to the race at this point, no matter what her/his party or qualifications, is utterly useless in any practical sense. There is chutzpah for you.