The latest round of campaign finance reports is in, and it looks like Democratic gubernatorial candidate Amanda Janoo is suffering the same fate as the other challengers to Gov. Phil Scott. She’s getting the cold shoulder from her party’s top officials and elected leaders.
Janoo raised $112,000 in August, bringing her campaign total to $415,000. Even if she still had all that money in the bank, it wouldn’t be enough to seriously contend with the governor. But she spent most of it in a costly primary against Aly Richards, so she enters September with a measly $59,000 in cash on hand.
Scott, who has barely even tried to mount a campaign, has five times as much in his kitty. And we’re practically in the home stretch; a bit more than two months remain before Election Day.
I ran into fellow Vermont Political Observer Kevin Ellis in the food coop earlier this week. He asked me what Janoo needed to do to win. “Everything,” I said. For starters, I said she needed a strong September 1 finance report: a minimum of $200,000, and preferably something north of $500,000. I didn’t honestly expect her to crack a half mill, but she certainly needed to do better than one-fifth of that.
Caveat: Money isn’t everything. Grassroots enthusiasm helps. But you can’t run an effective statewide campaign without at least some cash. You’ve gotta get on TV in a substantial way, to try to eat into Scott’s huge advantage in familiarity. Janoo doesn’t have nearly enough, and her shortfall sends a loud signal to the monied class: Don’t waste your money.
Janoo did very well with small-to-medium donors, racking up page after page of gifts in the range of $50 to $500. She got very few large donations. Conspicuous by their absence from her donor list: Democratic Party bigwigs and elected officials. That’s a dirty goddamn shame, and a stain on the party’s soul. If it has one.
On the day after Janoo’s primary victory, I wrote this:
The Democrats need to get their shoulders behind Janoo’s candidacy. Treat her like the party’s standard-bearer instead of that embarrassing relative you hope stays away at Thanksgiving.
First thing, big endorsement party for Janoo. Press conference with as many officeholders and party officials as possible. Attendance as mandatory as you can make it. Those officeholders who hold substantial campaign reserves need to show up with big fat Publishers’ Clearinghouse novelty checks to the Janoo campaign. Talkin’ to you, Mike Pieciak, Charity Clark, Sarah Copeland Hanzas, Molly Gray, Tim Ashe, Nikhil Goyal, Ben Brickner, Bram Kranichfeld, etc., etc., etc.
Yeah, well, instead of that, we got a hastily-convened press conference with no attempt at staging that produced the least convincing group photo I’ve seen in a long time. I won’t tread on copyright here, so if you want to see it, click on this link. Go ahead, I’ll wait.
…
See what I mean? The Democratic ticket hastily assembles for the first and probably last time, just long enough to take a group picture. They didn’t bother to put Janoo front and center. None of the customary American and Vermont flags, no festive banners or balloons. Tim Ashe didn’t even comb his hair.
And yes, there was not a single oversized novelty check to be seen.
Furthermore, Janoo’s September 1 filing reveals that nobody in that picture donated to her campaign in the entire month of August. Nor has any other Democratic officeholder or candidate. One kinda-sorta exception: Retiring Auditor Doug Hoffer, a Progressive/Democrat with the emphasis on the former, gave Janoo $200. Democratic Party chair Lachlan Francis kicked in $200, as he also did for Molly Gray. Former state representative Mary Sullivan has given Janoo a total of $1,660, the campaign fund of former state rep Bob Hooper kicked in $500.
(A few deep-pocketed Democratic donors have stepped up: Evie Lovett (the max $5,180), Bill Stetson ($2,000), and former party chair Dottie Deans ($100 in August plus earlier gifts totaling $1,422). Barbarina and Aaron Heyerdahl, who lean Progressive in their giving, have donated a total of nearly $8,000 to Janoo. That’s nice, but it’s a very short list.)
The complete lack of support from Democratic elected officials sends a clear message that they don’t believe in their putative standard-bearer. A public display of tangible backing would go a long way to make Janoo credible to the electorate. Instead, they’re running the same playbook as in the last four gubernatorial elections: Let someone take the nomination and write ’em out of the will.
Way, way back in 2016, Sue Minter raised $2.2 million. That remains the high water mark. Since then, it’s been one disgrace after another, steadily getting worse and worse. If you think I’m exaggerating, get a load of this depressing set of numbers.
2016: Sue Minter vs. then-LG Phil Scott. As of September 1, Minter raised $1.16 million. Her final total was $2.1 million. Election result: Scott 53%, Minter 44%.
2018: Christine Hallquist raised $243,000 by September 1, finished with $591,000, and lost to Scott 55-40.
2020: David Zuckerman raised $461,000 by September 1, finished with $702,000, and lost 68-27.
2022: Brenda Siegel raised $103,000 by September 1, finished with $188,000, and lost 71-24.
2024: Esther Charlestin raised $22,000 by September 1, finished with $42,000, and lost 73-22.
Asterisks: 1. Zuckerman and Janoo were in competitive primaries, so they raised and spent a lot of money before the general campaign. 2. Zuckerman had his own well-developed grassroots donor base; he got little to no help from the Democratic party or its regular donors.
So you look at that, and what do you see? You see a Democratic Party that has failed to support the person at the top of its ticket. The result: A series of increasingly catastrophic outcomes that didn’t otherwise impact the party’s fortunes until 2024. Also, Scott’s narrative has gone unchallenged during his entire governorship, which is the biggest single reason he’s on the precipice of setting the all-time record for tenure in office.
I really hoped the party would learn from 2024 and get behind the primary winner. I guess you could say they got behind Amanda Janoo… as far behind as they could possibly get.
A note on the illustration. “Future endeavored” is an entry in the unique vocabulary of pro wrestling. When a promotion releases performers, it often issues a statement wishing them well on their future endeavors. It’s another way of saying “Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.” Well, the Vermont Democratic Party has future endeavored its last four gubernatorial candidates as soon as they were nominated, and it’s doing the same with Amanda Janoo. She deserves better. And the Democrats, collectively, have failed the people of Vermont by not putting up a fight against Phil Scott.
I hate being a guy that says these sorts of things now, but this is the same typical limp-noodle Democrat behavior we see on the national stage. They’ve got comfort in knowing their lot is unchallenged, so why bother being bold?
Sick of it.
With all respect to the power of primary voters to nominate Ms Janoo, do you really think Janoo is qualified? Perhaps our donor class knows a thing or two about the danger of pure populism.
Can you share one example of a viable and implementable plan that Janoo has offered to address our budget / tax challenges, or the overall malaise of our economy. I can’t.
She’s puts on a great show, and people sure to love to feel like someone is listening. I’d be honored to have her as a guest at a dinner party, but she skipped some key rungs in the ladder on the climb to the Governors seat.
The ‘donor class’….you mean the ruling class of psychopaths – Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior because surely it better to have thieves and con artists influencing/handling the affairs of state since they do best at protecting their own and making sure any claims to the wealth of society (‘surplus’) are squashed and any and all tax dollars are shoved into their and their cronies pockets. Ever wonder way the dollars that are allocated for social programs have to pass through the hands of non-profit and for profit bureaucracies administered to by the PMC who gatekeep and grift on behalf of the you little ruling class? Sure the ‘donor’ class knows something – its the ‘tacit conspiracy of social class’ but oh right – we don’t have social classes in America – just self-interested individuals clamoring to harness the ‘primordial forces of nature’ in their pursuit of ‘life, liberty and happiness’.
Vote Janoo and down with your f**king ‘donor’ class.
I’d say “sociopaths” instead of “psychopaths,” but po-TAY-to, po-TAH-to.
The Dems simply offer up a sacrificial victim until the GOP incumbent decides to retire. Then they seriously back someone, sort of a, “Now it’s our turn!” mentality.
I think they view themselves as a club rather than a diverse group of people united by a common purpose.
The GOP locally is definited united by a common purpose, even if it is summarized by, “Government is bad for you; elect me, and I will prove it.” They back their people to the hilt every time.
I
TOLD YOU SO. The upper class d’rats would rather vote for a Trump stooge since their core values (money for me before all) aligns with Trump’s and the country’s political criminal and psychopathological elite.
This is fight for the future of Vermont – whether it will continue to be a bastion of racism and classism (wealthy old white liberals controlling everything and channeling huge sums of public money into the pockets of their cronies) disguised as bucolic landscapes and mythological yankee small town goodness or a future where people actually have a life that is not centered around affluent middle-class whiteness, conformity and ‘aren’t we Vermonters so special’.
Pony up for Janoo or be force to leave the state with chump change in your pocket as the wealthy white people continue to buy up your land and turn you into a wage smuck mowing their lawns.
Hi ,
I am a three term state rep and I donated $50 to Amanda close to (before) the primary. I bet there are others too…
Michelle Bos-Lun Windham 3 State Representative Westminster, Rockingham and Brookline
I didn’t mean to omit you. I only reviewed the 9/1 filing, which included August. The point I was trying to make is that post-primary, the party had an obligation to get behind their nominee and they pretty much didn’t.