Phil Scott Slides Below 50%, John Rodgers Is in Trouble, and Other Notes from a New UNH Poll

Leave a reply

After months of essentially ignoring the contested statewide primary races, our media outlets are suddenly starting to pay attention. It’s as if somebody glanced at a calendar and realized the primary is less than three weeks away, wow, we’d better get on the stick.

I mean, a story posted this week by Vermont Public termed the primary “sleepy,” to which I say, well, whose fault is that? The Democratic candidates for governor and lieutenant governor have been working their asses off, traveling around the state, speaking to anyone who will invite them, and fundraising at a robust pace. They’ve been doing their part; it’s the media that have, until now, made this a “sleepy” primary by paying it little attention.

Enough ranting, let’s get to business. The University of New Hampshire Research Center has published another poll on Vermont politics, and the basic throughline is a gradual cementing of previously seen trends. But there are some notable results, such as a drop below 50% approval for our legendarily popular Gov. Phil Scott. In a June survey, Scott had fallen from his accustomed perch in the low to mid 60s down to 51%. (He was at 60% as recently as last fall.) Now he’s at 48%, with 43% disapproving and 8% expressing no opinion. What’s more, the ranks of the “Strongly” disapproving rose from 15% to 20%. Fresh dents in the Teflon?

There’s more in the gubernatorial numbers but first I want to hit the LG results, which show incumbent Republican John Rodgers in serious trouble. In hypothetical matchups, Rodgers loses to any of the three Democrats in the race — including Esther Charlestin. And he seems to be falling further behind. Another thing: on the gambling racket prediction marketplace Kalshi, for what it’s worth, 71% of the wagers are on the Democrats taking back the ol’ bucket of warm piss. (Fascinating Kalshi note: “Republican” held a 60-40 edge until July 3, when “Republican” took a sudden plunge and “Democrat” surged. The market has stayed essentially the same since then.) (Humbling Kalshi note: Bets on the LG race total less than $14,000, while bets on “LeBron James Next Team” are more than $214,000,000.)

Continue reading →

“Vermont Officials” Concerned About Trump Tariffs… But Where’s the Guy in Charge? (UPDATED With Due Credit to the Guy) (UPDATED AGAIN with another correction, I picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue)

11 Replies

Update! Apparently the governor’s office did issue a statement slamming the tariffs. How Digger ignored it, I have no idea.

Update to the update! I got the timing wrong on the Digger story’s publication and Scott issuing a statement. Details below.

Following Donald Trump’s precipitous announcement of 50% tariffs on a variety of Canadian goods, VTDigger reporter Theo Wells-Spackman was tasked with chronicling the potential economic harm to our state, which is heavily dependent on cross-border trade and tourism. In the process, he gathered reactions from various Vermont officials. He did a decent job of it, but there was one notable and unexplained absence from the piece.

I’ll give you three guesses, and the first two don’t count.

The officials who made appearances in the story included, in this order, state economist Tom Kavet (who called Trump’s move “pure stupidity”), Treasurer Mike Pieciak, Amy Magnus of Vermont-based customs broker A.N. Deringer (the tariffs are “downright shocking”), and U.S. Sen. Peter Welch (Trump’s policy has “caused undeniable harm” and “economic chaos”).

A nice list. But who’s not there? Who’s conspicuous by their absence?

Why, our fearless, resolute Governor Phil Scott, that’s who. He was not quoted, nor was anyone from his administration. Wells-Spackman did not reveal whether he sought reaction from Scott or his minions. If he didn’t, well, that’s reportorial and editorial malpractice. The state’s top official should be heard from. If Wells-Spackman sought reaction and didn’t get any, that should have been reported in his article.

Either way, Phil Scott is conspicuous by his absence. And Digger might have let him off the hook for it.

Update. Apologies to the governor, and brickbats to VTDigger. Scott issued a full-throated statement yesterday afternoon at 1:00 slamming the Trump tariffs as “a bad idea” in bold font. This is all on Wells-Spackman, his editors, and Digger entire. His story was published at 6:21 p.m., more than five hours after the governor’s statement came out. Did they fail to notice? Did they somehow decide that the governor’s views weren’t relevant an article about “Vermont officials” reacting to the tariff announcement? It’s literally incredible.

The governor’s statement in full:

“My feelings on punitive tariffs imposed on Canada have not changed over the last two years and are simply a bad idea that will lead to increased costs on Vermonters. As I’ve said before, this added burden would create real challenges for our residents and businesses who are already facing economic headwinds. Canadians are our friendly neighbors and long‑time allies, and we should be working together to find solutions that strengthen the region, not further divide us. As I prepare to host the Premiers of Eastern Canadian Provinces in Vermont next month, my message is clear: we are good friends and partners, and I’m committed to strengthening our economic and cultural ties to benefit both sides of the border.”

Update to the update, and the updates are now longer than the original story. I got it wrong. The governor’s statement was issued the day after Digger published Wells-Spackman’s piece, not the same day. Careless error on my part, and I apologize. The story was published on 7/21, and Scott’s statrement came out midday on 7/22.

Which leaves me wondering about two things. First, did Wells-Spackman reach out to Scott’s office for comment? If not, why not? If so, why not include it in the story? And second, did Scott’s comms team cobble together a statement after Digger published? That’s a bit embarrassing.

And I hope this is the last time I have to revisit this cluster.

Elite Hobnobbing Opportunity!!! For Those With Ten Grand Burning a Hole in Their Pocket

1 Reply

Next month, Gov. Phil Scott is hosting the annual meeting of New England governors and Eastern Canadian premiers… and YOU can get in on the action.

If, that is, you can pony up at least $2,500 for the privilege.

A reader (who shall remain nameless) forwarded me a two-page offer of “partnership opportunities” for the shindig, clearly aimed at well-heeled business types who can claim their big spends as deductible business expenses. The “opportunities” are offered at three levels: $2,500, $5,000, and $10,000. Not disclosed anywhere: Who gets the money? Does it help defray the costs of the meeting? I guess so. I hope none of it goes to, say, Scott’s re-election campaign, because as Dick Nixon reportedly said of paying off the Watergate burglars, “That would be wrong.”

Continue reading →

One Last Go-Round for Doug Hoffer

2 Replies

When you visit the official website of almost any elected officeholder, you’ll be greeted by a picture of said grandee. Or a whole bunch of pictures, because the ever-hungry ego must be placated.

But not Auditor Doug Hoffer. When you visit his homepage, you see a rotating gallery of Vermont writers who have won major awards, including Robert Frost, David Moats, Galway Kinnell, and yes, Louise Glück. I find that refreshing. Touching, really.

Hoffer’s not your typical politician. Sure, he’s got an ego and a sense of his own importance, but he has never ever expressed the slightest interest in climbing the political ladder. He’s kept his nose to the grindstone and produced a lot of great work, holding state government accountable for how it spends our tax dollars. Because as a Progressive (slash Democrat), he believes that government performs many valuable functions and has a responsibility to do them as efficiently as possible.

He isn’t as focused on self-promotion as most politicians. And I think he has suffered for it; his work has been routinely undercovered in our media and often ignored by those in the Legislative or Executive branches who ought to be taking his findings to heart. A couple of factors have worked against him: (1) Democrats and Republicans don’t like Progressives, and that’s his primary political orientation, and (2) he often challenges conventional wisdom, and nobody likes to hear that.

Now he’s on his way out, retiring at the end of his current term. He’s spending some of his last months in office encapsulating his past efforts in easily digestible form, hoping that people will pay attention. Kind of like an old rock-and-roller putting out a Greatest Hits album. Spoiler alert: It ain’t working very well. He’s getting the full lame-duck treatment. It’s a damn shame.

Continue reading →

Are the Republicans Even Trying for the State Senate?

Leave a reply

I’ve done a fairly close reading of the July 1 campaign finance reports for state Senate candidates (So You Don’t Have To), and one thing jumped right out at me: Republican candidates are be doing little or nothing.

Including at least a couple of incumbents. It’s remarkable.

A couple of caveats apply. Few of these people face primary competition, so it’s early. And in 2024, the Barons of Burlington swarmed in after the 4th of July and dumped four-figure checks into the campaign accounts of several Republican Senate candidates plus LG hopeful John Rodgers. They could still do the same this year. We eagerly await the August 1 campaign finance deadline.

But there’s one fact, previously noted in this space, that makes me think it might not happen. In the spring of 2024, Gov. Phil Scott’s campaign blew a bunch of money on polling. A curious expenditure, given that he had clear sailing in his bid for another term. From the course of events it’s easy to infer that the polling focused on other races, specifically LG and the Senate. Because it was after the polling that (a) the Barons activated their checkbooks and (b) Scott himself got off his ass and actively campaigned for those key candidates.

Well, this spring the Scott campaign did virtually nothing. It spent a mere $7,000 between March 15 and July 1, and none of it was for polling. I can’t say for sure that Scott and the Republicans have given up on extending their legislative gains of 2024, but it’s kinda-sorta starting to look that way. They may be content with preventing a return of Democratic supermajorities. Which should be achievable; I think it’ll be a long time before the Dems win 20 seats in the Senate again.

Continue reading →

A Curious Candidacy in the Windsor Senate Primary (Updated)

7 Replies

This, friends and neighbors, is Ben Brickner, Democratic candidate for state Senate in the Windsor district.

Practically oozes Vermontitude, doesn’t it? Appropriately faded ballcap, fleece quarter-zip, jeans, rurally appropriate dog, outdoorsy backdrop. Touch of gray in the close-cropped beard. His campaign website leans heavily on his service as chair of the Pomfret selectboard. Cool.

But looky here. This is also Ben Brickner.

Tempting to offer a remark about the Hair Club for Men, but that would be mean. So let’s get to the heart of the matter. The bespoke-suited Ben Brickner is a partner in the New York City law firm Person Ferdinand who specializes in “corporate finance, securities, and capital markets transactions,” according to the Pierson website. Pierson is headquartered in NYC but has 18 offices around the United States plus an outpost in London. Kind of a big deal.

You won’t see a hint of that in any of his campaign materials, nor in a flattering story about his candidacy in The Mountain Times.

What’s more, Brickner’s July 1 campaign finance filing is a real eye-opener. He has raised a stunning $65,000 so far, including 18 maximum individual contributions of $1,940 plus another seven gifts of $1,000 or more.

That would have been virtually unprecedented for any state Senate race until 2024, when the Barons of Burlington threw their weight behind several Republican candidates for Senate and, well, Stewart Ledbetter. But I doubt there’s ever been any candidate for any office in Windsor County who’s raised anywhere near $65,000.

If you live in the Windsor district, you should expect a flood of mailings from Team Ben before the August primary. He spent only $12,000 as of July 1, so he’s got more than $50,000 burning a hole in his pocket.

Continue reading →

A Curious Gathering of Lobbyists in a State Senate Primary

5 Replies

I’ve spent too much time in recent days going over campaign finance reports for all the races for state Senate. Well, all but Richard Westman’s unopposed bid for a [checks notes] twenty-fourth consecutive term in the Legislature. I think I’m safe in skipping that one.

There’s a lot to report, and it’ll be coming your way very soon. But here’s a little something I discovered that’s worth a moment of your time. It’s fairly small potatoes, but it might develop into something more.

The Senate race in the Orange district features incumbent Republican John Benson making his first bid for a full term (he was appointed in January to replace Larry Hart, Sr., who found out that lawmaking is hard work) and two Democratic hopefuls: State Rep. Monique Priestley and retired Department of Labor staffer Rose Lucenti. The seat is historically Democratic; it flipped Republican in the 2024 wave election, so the Democratic nominee will have a decent shot at unflipping it.

Priestley is doing just fine, thanks. She entered the cycle with $6,400 in the bank and proceeded to raise a healthy $23,000. She’s spent a bit more than $6,000, so she entered July with roughly $23,000 in cash on hand. That’s already enough money to compete in a mostly rural district.

Where things get a little intriguing is in Lucenti’s latest report.

Continue reading →

The Money Race Is, As They Say, Heating Up. In Some Precincts, Anyway.

2 Replies

The first of July marked the most important pre-primary campaign finance deadline for Vermont candidates. The occasion was marked by a depressing lack of coverage in our respectable media. VTDigger ran a boilerplate piece that reported a bunch of numbers but offered little insight. Seven Days and Vermont Public didn’t do anything, as far as I can tell. Our daily papers are a wasteland for political coverage and I rarely watch local TV news, which is largely an exercise in cranking out enough easy content to space out the advertising.

Which is a damn shame because there are definite points of interest, and because this is the most meaningful pre-primary snapshot of the money races. The previous deadline of March 15 was so early that some major candidates (Aly Richards, for instance) had yet to toss their metaphorical hats in the ring. The next deadline of August 1 is very close to primary day, so whatever might be revealed in those reports won’t have much of a chance to sink in.

Altough that’s kind of a moot point since the media is largely ignoring campaign finance altogether. If there was a nuclear revelation to be found, chances are nobody would notice and it would go unreported.

So let’s get to the July 1 numbers and what they tell us about Campaign 2026.

Continue reading →

Hey, We’ve Got a New Poll and… Phil Scott is Vulnerable??

1 Reply

Speaking from experience, one of the biggest mistakes political pundits can make is writing political obituaries for Gov. Phil Scott. He is the grand champeen of Vermont politicians, having gone undefeated since his original election to the state Senate way back in 2000. If he wins re-election in November, he will have done what no other Vermonter has managed: winning six gubernatorial elections. He’s a couple years shy of Howard Dean’s record tenancy in the corner office, but Dean first became governor upon the death of Dick Snelling. He was elected governor “only” five times.

Still, a new opinion poll brings some bad news for Scott. He remains the overwhelming favorite to go where no pol has gone before, but the bloom is coming off the rose. Storm clouds can be seen on the distant horizon. There are perceptible dents in his previously spotless Teflon coat. The tires are showing signs of wear.

Enough half-baked analogies. Since there are no polling organizations in Vermont, we have to settle for this offering from the University of New Hampshire Survey Center. There are a bunch of interesting numbers to be found, but let’s start with the bloom and the clouds and the dents and the tires.

Scott’s favorability rating, whose customary habitat is in the stratosphere, now sits uncomfortably close to 50%. In matchups with relatively little-known Democratic opponents, he comes nowhere near a majority. And only one-third of Vermonters think the state is headed in the right direction.

And now, the details.

Continue reading →

So Brenda Siegel Was… Right? All Along

5 Replies

When I’ve had conversations with someone in Vermont officialdom and the name “Brenda Siegel” comes up, it usually elicits a bit of a grimace. Siegel isn’t a comfortable character. She’s direct, some would say abrasive. She’s a fierce advocate for an unpopular cause. When she walks into a legislative hearing, the assembled lawmakers brace for impact. When she earned the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2022, the party offered some support but endorsements were few and the donor class shunned her campaign.

And now that H.938 has become law as Act 143, she ought to be taking a nice long victory lap. She did issue a press release; otherwise I suspect she got right back to work.

Act 143 is far from perfect, but it’s a much better law than any of our political leaders really wanted. It’s an attempt at creating a comprehensive response to homelessness instead of the box of Band-Aids that is the hotel/motel program. Crucially, it requires for the first time that the state’s homelessness response system must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. I bet you thought that was a given, but apparently not.

There are other heroes in this story — House Human Services Chair Theresa Wood and Rep. Jubilee McGill for starters — but it wouldn’t have happened without Siegel’s tenacity and willingness to be unpopular in the service of her cause.

And in the category of poetic justice, End Homelessness Vermont, the nonprofit she founded and ran on a shoestring, is now part of the official system. The state’s FY2027 budget includes a $200,000 appropriation for EHV, which will now work alongside state agencies to try to lift the unhoused into safe, productive lives.

Gee, maybe she could have been a good governor after all.

Continue reading →