|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Editor: our apologies for the erroneous headline in today’s newsletter.
by Greg Thayer
As the Primary elections are in the rear view mirror and other forms of nominations are set for the General Election on 5 November, it is obvious that Vermont needs a closed Primary system. This is one of the most important general elections that we will ever vote in.
First, congratulations to the winners. For those of us who did not prevail and did not earn the right to participate in the genaral election, keep your head high, you stepped up and put your name on a public ballot. Most people will never do that and your actions are appreciated.
I lost the vote count, but I didn’t lose. I got to talk to and listen to thousands and thousands and thousands of great Vermonters across our great little State. I was able to share their hopes, frustrations, and disappointments on the stage. Letting their voices be heard loudly.
I have my feelings and thoughts about what some “republicans” did during the Primary. Its nonsense to say that a Conservative cannot win against a Democrat-Socialist, because we are to Conservative. We are more of a true contrast from anyone on the other side. To me that is what is needed. Because when a moderate Republican runs, they’re about the same ideologically to a Democrat, and it doesnt matter who people really vote for. We’ve seen that in the gubentorial race for the past 10 years. In the LT. Governor’s race, our party has put up four moderate Republican’s (Randy Brock, Don Turner, Jr, Scott Milne, & Joe Benning) and they have all lost soundly. The last Republican elected LT. Governor was a Conservative, and prolife Patriot named Brian Dubie. Maybe we need to get behind a real common-sense Republican.
Additionally, in my Lieutenant Governor’s race ten days ago we saw a number of Democrats vote in the Republican Primary. Lets look at some numbers. Only 24,985 Republican ballots were cast, thats only 15% of all 507,023 registered voters in Vermont. Phil Scott received 22,173 votes. In the LT. Governor’s race a total of 22,458 ballots were cast. In the US Senate, the SOS, and for State Treasurer Republican Primary, there were 20,383, 18,989, and 19,286 respectively, votes cast Statewide. My team estimates that nearly 4,00 to 4,500 Democrats crossed over to vote in the GOP Primary. They voted for Scott and my opponent, but not for down ticket Republican candidates or real Republicans. But without a clear capture when requesting your ballot we don’t know.
In the end, this is our open election system. Like it or not. Until we elect Republicans under the Gold Dome, we cannot change the system.
Two years ago I said that people can vote for whomever they chose.. For me, I’m a proud common-sense Vermont Conservative Republican that supports freedom, liberty, innovation, transparency, and personal responsibility. Equally, I’m pro-gun, pro-life, pro-workers, pro-family. I do not support the legalization of marijuana or the decriminization of various crimes, and I’m a President Trump supporter. My primary opponent does not align with me on these issues. For those reasons, I will not give up my principles. To me, he helped put working Vermonters in this bad situation.
Greg Thayer is a Rutland resident and former candidate for lieutenant governor.
Contribute to Vermont Daily Chronicle via Stripe.com – quick, easy, confidential
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary
Should the headline read: “Vermont Needs a Closed Primary” instead of “Open”? I agree with Mr. Thayer. Simply, each party should select its candidate.
A closed primary, you mean Nikki Haley won’t be able to win Vermont no more?
I support “Liberty” and “Freedom”, but I want to steal all your money for the drug enforcement police state, and allow gangs and criminal groups to fund themselves with things like “marijuana”, ignoring that it’s bankrupting and killing us, and has never worked to stop users of said products. Sounds super free, and “personal responsibility” to me.
I don’t think those words mean what you think they mean.
VermontVermonter, I was opposed to the legalization of marijuana (still am), but not for reasons some might suspect. I am opposed, because: a) it’s a plant, legal or illegal shouldn’t even be a conversation, b) we DO NOT need another taxpayer funded bureaucratic agency to regulate the production, use or sale of A PLANT! If one wants to grow, use, sell a plant it, it certainly shouldn’t be any concern to the government. If one uses the plant and operates a machine with death or injury resulting than that person MUST be accountable for their actions and poor judgment. This coming from a person who does NOT use weed, I just don’t think it is the government’s business about personal choices unless those choices harm anyone else.
@Jonathan Johnson
I agree.
“I will not give up my principles” In order to give up principles, you must first have them to begin with. You don’t have principles if you pick and choose where they apply and don’t apply. Freedom and Liberty for only “the things I like” are not principles.
What you say about 4 moderates being put up for Lt. Governor and losing resoundingly does make much sense, to which nobody wants to listen.
Part of the issue is that there is no team, there is no plan, this is asymmetrical warfare. We have to be wiser than snakes and more innocent than doves.
The other corollary is that if there was any orchestration, sectional work being done from within the party (I refuse to use “organizer” as term) then you could have also easily won.
However, the Uniparty the VTGOP will not allow anything that doesn’t go along with the uniparty plan, which is Trump Bad, Marxism/corruption good. There actions are really not much different than the VTDems, but they do it in a nicer less obvious fashion. For example.
Keith Stern, wouldn’t give him any support, any lists nothing in the primary. Hell at the summer meeting they wouldn’t even introduce him, Phil Scott got all the attention. This is a VERY serious problem, because it shows the party is not playing fair and is not truly open to new candidates. A confident leader would not be afraid of any challenger. A confident party would support all their people running for office, which would encourage others to run.
If you asked candidates that ran for office the following questions…
How did the VTGOP support you?
Did you feel valued within the VTGOP?
Did the VTGOP give you tools, advice, people and money to support your campaign?
What support did you get from the Governor?
What support did you get from Paul Dame?
What support did you get from the County Chairs?
How would you rate the VTGOP as an effective organization from 1-10?
What challenges have you faced working with the VTGOP?
These questions would expose areas of excellence and where we need improvement.
There are some constants in Vermont, different than other playing fields.
We are a subverted state, making our field of play very different than national.
We know they cannot veer from their plans.
We know they are not for freedom
We know they are not for truth
We know they are not for bringing people together
We know they are about fear, money and control
We know the propaganda is massive and very, very sophisticated
We know they cannot accept free speech
We know they are unhappy
These things won’t change, which makes for an easy recipe to craft their own defeat. It’s a bit of rope a dope and pepsi vs. coke. Instead of fighting we need to only expose them, they will crumble under their own devices, that is the way to have fun and win hearts and minds.
We have to admit, what we’ve done hasn’t worked. Review what has worked, assess strengths and weaknesses and make a reasonable, attainable goal and build from those victories. We are currently searching for winning the World Series when our teams haven’t played a full season, with a full complement of players, or even a well-functioning special team. Hell, a well playing quartet or quintet within the party could start the transformation, but they won’t allow that.
We don’t have an outline for the massive changes needed to happen from within the party, organizationally we suffer greatly.
Neil I always enjoy reading your comments and agree with you every time. The Republican party is falling into irrelevancy but I hope the dems overstepped themselves this time and have given us some life again. I am hoping since I decided to jump in one more time for representatives. There is a lot of anger out there this year but I’m skeptical that it will actually lead to changes.
Re: “The last Republican elected LT. Governor was a Conservative, and prolife Patriot named Brian Dubie.”
Respectfully Greg, I disagree. I imagine you left out Phil Scott on purpose because you don’t consider him a “real” Republican. I know and like both men, understand they have some differences, but consider them both Republican. I suggest a comparison of their election success is in order to demonstrate why we may disagree on how the party should move forward presenting candidates if we are ever going to get beyond our present difficulties.
Brian first ran for Lt. Governor in 2002. He had no opponent in the primary. He lost the general election to Douglas Racine, 152,561 to 118,2002, in an election that had a total of 286,073 votes cast. Oddly enough this mirrors the 2022 election numbers for the same office, where I defeated you in the primary. I think we both agree that you are farther to the right than I am, but I don’t recall your ever claiming that Democrats crossed over to vote for me in that primary. Most pertinent is the way my general election numbers mirrored that of the 2002 general election. I lost to David Zuckerman, 150,102 to 118,724 in an election that had a total of 291,955 votes cast.
I think we probably can both agree that Brian Dubie was not as far to the left as Doug Racine and I am not as far to the left as David Zuckerman. So in my mind the similarity of both elections undermines your contention that voters didn’t have a clear enough contrast to care.
Brian went on to win his next three campaigns for Lt. Governor, winning an average of 50.75% of the vote over the four elections he ran in. He never had a primary opponent. When he first succeeded in attaining the office in 2002, he earned 41.2% of the general election tally. He also had the benefit of the left splitting itself between Peter Shumlin with 32.2% of the vote and Anthony Pollina with 24.8%. Thereafter he won handily. He subsequently ran against Shumlin for Governor in 2010, but lost by over 4,300 votes.
Let me pause here to note the race of Shumlin versus Scott Milne in 2014. I suspect we both agree Scott Milne is considered a moderate. Disgruntled Republicans on the right, who considered him not a “real” Republican, splintered off that year to voice support for Dan Feliciano. I know and like both Scott and Dan, but there is no doubt in my mind that Dan’s general election vote count of 8,428 scuttled what would have otherwise been a victory for Scott, who ended up losing to Shumlin 89,509 to 87,075. The public had tired of Shumlin’s push to the left. Please note this Republican split predates the appearance of Donald Trump.
Now lets compare Phil Scott, who your essay implies is to the left of Brian Dubie. Phil Scott ran in three Lt. Governor elections and won each time, garnering an average of 56% of the vote over that time. His subsequent campaigns for Governor have all been successful and he’s won by crushing numbers. Even you must concede that he is extremely popular with Vermont’s electorate.
So I disagree with your conclusion. As the left pushes further towards its extremes, I believe Vermont’s general electorate will gravitate towards a moderate Republican. That general electorate will never feel comfortable supporting those on the far right. Hopefully the passing of this next presidential election will leave all of us Republicans with a clearer view on how to get our own elected.
Last I knew VT DEMs has a super majority….multiple times……and it’s always the fault of those who didn’t get elected as to why you, Scott and Dame can’t’ get a winning party?
You guys have complete control of the entire party for what 25 years and as a whole you’ve lost completely? Tell us all about your stunning victories, please we are listening……while writing out this years tax bill I might add.
So how does that make you right and him wrong?
The results are stunning, apparently the electorate want’s nothing to do with your current plan either, huh?
There is way too much pride in this state and in our leadership, you defending complete utter and total losses for 25 years proves that point.
Give the communists what they want vote them all in and let them sink this place!!! It can not be saved. Moving out… good luck to all and don’t forget to pay the power bill.
Great thesis: we can’t make changes until we elect more Republicans, let me tell you why I won’t support this Republican that kicked my butt. You can’t make up this kind of stupid. The kind that can’t even title their op-ed right. That same lack of detail is how he would govern…
in fairness the headline goof was the editor’s