Must have been some soiled britches at VTGOP headquarters when the news came out: a new poll shows the race for governor is a statistical dead heat.
If it’s accurate, of course. Usual caveats apply. Doesn’t help that this is the only pre-election poll we’re going to get, since VPR is the only media organization putting up money for surveys this year.
But for the sake of argument, let’s assume it’s reasonably on target.
There were reasons to believe the race would be close, but the almost universal assumption (me included) was that Phil Scott was the front-runner because of his name recognition, his inoffensive image, and Vermonters’ presumed post-Shumlin fatigue with liberal policymaking. Minter, by comparison, was known (to the extent she was known at all) mainly as a Shumlin underling, which meant she would struggle to create a profile of her own.
Instead, here we are, with Scott at 39 percent, Minter at 38, and a rather surprising 14 percent undecided.
So why is this race so close? Assuming, again, that the poll is accurate.
For starters, Minter has been underestimated from the very beginning. Many observers wondered why she was even trying, with the higher-profile Matt Dunne and (at the time) Shap Smith in the race. Her campaign seemed to stumble initially; she replaced her original campaign manager a few months into the race.
But her fundraising appeal turned out to be much higher than expected, thanks in part to EMILY’s List and to Vermont women (and the people who respect them) wanting to break the glass ceiling in place since Madeleine Kunin left office. Minter quickly erased Dunne’s financial head start, and sustained her momentum throughout.
She won the Democratic primary with ease, which might have prompted wiser heads to re-evaluate her strength as a candidate. But no, the assumption was that Minter didn’t win as much as Matt Dunne lost. She was still seen as a decided underdog in the fall campaign.
Poll says otherwise.
It’s also surprising that Scott hasn’t managed to crack 40 percent. You’d think, with his resume full of warm fuzzies*, he’d have no trouble getting into the mid-40s. Perhaps the Republican base has shrunk farther than we thought.
*Genial character, conflict avoider, race car driver, blue-collar businessman, Wheels for Warmth, manly yet approachable, etc., etc.
That would explain the other poll results: every other statewide Republican candidate is trailing badly, and Trump’s getting trumped big-time by Hillary Clinton. By comparison, Scott’s doing great. But it might not be enough.
At this point, again assuming the poll is accurate, I’d have to say Sue Minter is the favorite. The most likely development of the last three weeks is a continued cratering in support for Donald Trump and the concomitant disaffection of Republican voters. Clearly, Trump is an albatross around Scott’s neck. The burden is likely to get heavier by Election Day.
— Minter’s about to get a significant push, thanks to the active support of Bernie Sanders. They’ll hold joint rallies in six cities this weekend. That will drive a lot of media attention and reinforce the unity of the left in the face of the Republican agenda.
— There is a fundamental baked-in advantage for any Democratic candidate. Republicans have real trouble being competitive at any level, except in the few and thinly-populated conservative areas of the state (The Kingdom, Rutland, Franklin County.) Minter’s an underrated candidate, but she’s also enjoying that automatic advantage.
— One massive factor that’s generally ignored is the size of the electorate in Presidential years. In an off year, speaking very roughly, about 300,000 Vermonters cast ballots. In Presidential years, that number gets close to 400,000. Most of the “extra” votes are liberal. Any Vermont Republican running in a Presidential year is swimming against a very strong tide.
— Scott’s advantage with his core issues is surprisingly small. His edge with voters on the economy is 41 to 28 percent. On taxes, it’s 42 to 28. For all his drum-beating on affordability, he has failed to make those issues firmly his own.
— In general, neither candidate has much of an advantage on any issue. Perhaps this is because so many voters are disengaged. On environment and clean energy, Minter had a 40-29 percent edge; on education, her margin was 38-31. You’d think those margins would be bigger. But on issue after issue, the results were in the same narrow range: on conservative hot buttons, Scott is up 10 points or so, and on liberal causes Minter is up about 10. I take this as evidence that most voters are making up their minds based on partisanship, or on their view of the candidates as people, not because of policy positions.
— The massive pro-Scott investment by the Republican Governors’ Association has failed to move the needle. Their ads will continue to come fast and furious, but Minter and her national allies have enough funds to be competitive on the paid-media front.
— The constant scrutiny of We Political Junkies notwithstanding, a lot of people are just not paying attention. Even now. 39 percent said they were “not very” or “not at all” familiar with the candidates. Most of those people are apparently voting party line; the rest, presumably, make up the 14 percent undecided.
— The race for governor will be decided between now and Election Day. That means the Trump Factor may well be decisive. If his standing continues to worsen, Scott’s battle gets tougher.
— Trump’s misogyny and gropiness are likely to drive women (and those who respect women) to the polls in large numbers. Advantage Minter.
— The Spaceman’s ass-clown campaign is getting him just what he deserves: two percent of the vote. Good riddance.
A Very Strange Election Season – Difficult to Forecast the Political Winds !
Phil Scott (as well as Randy Brock) has clearly distanced himself from the Trump presidential circus act. In fact Phil, early on, voiced his decision to vote for Jim Douglas for President, rather than voting for either Trump or Clinton – two equally bad choices.
Oddly, if you get “into the weeds” of the poll you will discover that 8% of the Minter supporters indicated that they were voting for Trump and 13% of the Scott supporters are voting for Clinton. I have no idea what this represents other than it was unexpected.
This is a very strange election year and it is certainly a risky business to extrapolate to deeply based on supposition !
You can explore the “weeds” at: http://digital.vpr.net/post/vpr-poll-overall-results-full-data#stream/0
You have to hope too that a lot of vermonters are finally seeing what an empty suit Phil Scott is. Puppet boy.
No, YOU’RE the puppet. (Couldn’t resist.)
“You have to hope too that a lot of vermonters are finally seeing what an empty suit Phil Scott is.”
One can hope so. A guy I know who asked if I had seen the debate (I did not), asked me if I had noticed the contrast between Scott and Minter, where he is so droll and she’s ready to go and she actually articulates ideas compared to Scott.
While I generally agree with your take on this I am disappointed in your demeaning of Bill Lee. Of course his candidacy is not serious but he actually has some interesting things to say if you weed through the rambling. He hits me as an intelligent man. He may have said as many concrete thoughts as Scott did in the last debate and was pumping up Minter. I have enjoyed his participation lending a break to Scott’s dry monologue and I am not even a baseball fan!
Sorry, Vermont’s honored tradition of giving platforms to fringe candidates just annoys me.
How about those R radio ads telling us to vote for “local Republicans”?
I found Bill Lee very interesting to watch. He is a lot more fun than watching Scott!
Jeez, would it kill WCAX and WPTZ, who are making obscene profits in political ad revenue to commission a poll or two? I commend VPR for their lone effort.
Especially with the thousands and thousands of ad dollars they take in every campaign season. WCAX more than WPTZ.
WCAX DID commission a poll and they released the results yesterday.