Something to consider: Vermont, home of Bernie Sanders, will safely re-elect a Republican Governor..

[brooklynite]

Latest polling has Scott +31 over David Zuckerman.

SAFE R seat according to Cook and Sabato

[nycbos]

1. Federal elections and State elections are two entirely different things.

And as an alum of the University of Vermont, I can tell you that Vermont has an interesting political history that can be a little quirky.

Case in point they elect a Republican to run their State House send a socialist to the Senate.


Vermont did the same thing in Bernie's first Senate election, and there were times for mine has had Republican governors when he's been in The House.

[MissMillie]

2. My blue state seems to like its GOP governor as well

I think that in my state--Massachusetts--part of his appeal is that he is a "never-Trumper." (At least I hope that's part of it.)

[Claustrum]

4. I think some people have a firm belief in "check and balances" in the sense of having

different party to hold different branches of government and state government. That's why there is usually a huge swing against the incumbent president in the mid-terms.

[NewJeffCT]

6. In Massachusetts, a Republican governor is not very powerful

Democrats have a super majority in both Houses there and can override almost any veto.

[pat_k]

3. Strong message of hope for BIG, MEANINGFUL change. . .

... resonates across the political spectrum.

I wish Dems would really "get" this one of these days and start calling for a REAL war on poverty and a REAL war against racism.

It's been 56 years since we supposedly threw down the gauntlet in the war on poverty. (Although, as MLK pointed out, the funding of the bill wasn't enough for even a skirmish.)

The War on Poverty is the unofficial name for legislation first introduced by United States President Lyndon B. Johnson during his State of the Union address on January 8, 1964. ... Johnson stated, "Our aim is not only to relieve the symptom of poverty, but to cure it and, above all, to prevent it".

I think it's about time we follow through and stand boldly for reinventing ourselves in a way that FINALLY reflects the things this nation claims to stand for (you know, those pesky things like justice and equal opportunity).

Redeeming this nation can become a REAL source of patriotic pride for more than 60% of Americans across the political spectrum: Basic income. Reparations. Quality education. Universal health care. End mass incarceration. End coercive plea deals. (For starters). We CAN afford it. If Dems get control of Executive and Legislative branches, we must demand BIG CHANGES we could be truly proud of as a nation.

Tragically, there are about 40% who are just too steeped in racism and "prosperity gospel" shit. But we CAN redeem this nation without them.

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. Where a traditional Republican Party still survives it can sometimes be competitive

within states and districts that lean or are even solidly blue. If they run someone with legitimate personal integrity and a deeply rooted concept of public service who is not adverse to pursuing nonpartisan goals for the benefit of the public, sometimes that Republican might win. The problem of course is that those types of Republicans are not dominant within their party, and increasingly can not win Republican nominations to run for office.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

8. +1

[dsc]

7. which makes it impossible for us to tap Sanders for a role in the administration

same with MA and MD so no warren

[greenjar_01]

9. Do you have a point?

[OnDoutside]

10. The obvious one I see is who from the left will replace him, when he eventually retires ?