[Magic Qwan]

I feel the Bern, but Bernie critics say he ruined vermont with his progressive ideas. Is this true?

[thunderkat59]

Originally Posted by Magic Qwan

I feel the Bern, but Bernie critics say he ruined vermont with his progressive ideas. Is this true?

No. Not true.
I didnt know Vermont was ruined. Why didnt the past repub governor "ruin" Vermont?

[Magic Qwan]

Originally Posted by thunderkat59

No. Not true.
I didnt know Vermont was ruined. Why didnt the past repub governor "ruin" Vermont?

Yes, I would argue that Bernie was amazing for Vermont, but my mother in particular accuses him of driving out all the "best parts" of the economy. I disagree with her, and I was hoping for something to show things are doing better than they used to.

[cgregor]

Unlike the other major candidates, Bernie never sought the aegis of either wing-- Republican or Democratic-- of our nation's political party, but developed his base through service to the electorate, whether as a mayor, a congressperson or a senator. Unlike them, he is not driven to assume a pose in order to get funding from the constituency those wings have a knack for cultivating. The Vermont Democratic Party, after they challenged him with Dolores Sandoval, was canny enough to realize he might be better than anyone else they had in the stable. Kudos to them for supporting him thereafter.

[AmILost]

Originally Posted by Magic Qwan

I feel the Bern, but Bernie critics say he ruined vermont with his progressive ideas. Is this true?

Can a senator or congressperson ruin a state? Senators and congresspersons vote on national issues, not state issues. Before being a congressperson, Bernie was a mayor. If he was governor, I can see how he might have had a bigger hand in state affairs.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by Magic Qwan

Yes, I would argue that Bernie was amazing for Vermont, but my mother in particular accuses him of driving out all the "best parts" of the economy. I disagree with her, and I was hoping for something to show things are doing better than they used to.

It was really the influx of people like Bernie that drove out many jobs and caused property prices and taxes to skyrocket to unaffordable levels. Bernie didn't have a big hand in it individually but things are certainly not better than before in Vermont.

[sheena12]

I love Vermont! Vermont LOVES Bernie. Bernie loves Vermont.

Seriously, I don't know of anyone who lives in Vermont who has a bad word to say about Bernie. I visit there several times a year.

Bernie2016!

[cgregor]

There are two key ingredients (apart from being in the pocket of the major contributors) to staying on top in politics. The first is to remember everybody's name (and it doesn't hurt to know the names of all their family members and grandkids). The second is to offend as few people as possible. Since democracy is an ongoing exercise in compromise, the pol who manages to keep the most people the least disgruntled, whether at a local, state or national level, is the one who functions the best.

Bernie has never had the money from contributors in the amount most of Congress has, and in fact he is the second-poorest Senator; his strength is in dealing with all the issues in a manner that provides the best deal for all. Compare him with just about any other, and you'll see the difference.

[jackmccullough]

Originally Posted by cgregor

Unlike the other major candidates, Bernie never sought the aegis of either wing-- Republican or Democratic-- of our nation's political party, but developed his base through service to the electorate, whether as a mayor, a congressperson or a senator. Unlike them, he is not driven to assume a pose in order to get funding from the constituency those wings have a knack for cultivating. The Vermont Democratic Party, after they challenged him with Dolores Sandoval, was canny enough to realize he might be better than anyone else they had in the stable. Kudos to them for supporting him thereafter.

It's not exactly accurate to say the Democratic Party "challenged him with Dolores Sandoval".

Two years earlier Paul Poirier was the Democratic candidate and was, essentially, the spoiler. Bernie probably would have won without him. By that time, and certainly by the following election, the majority of Vermont Democrats were behind Bernie.

Dolores Sandoval entered and won the Democratic primary fair and square, but she really didn't have the support of the party. I observed at the time that we were potentially in a tight spot, because Bernie was bigger than the party so we wouldn't have a chance to put one of "our own"--party-identifying Democrats--on the slate until Bernie was done running, and I was right, but it has worked out very well for the party and for the state.

[jackmccullough]

Bernie has been excellent for the people and the state of Vermont. He has been a strong voice for the values of everyday Vermonters, even those who otherwise support Republicans (compare his vote totals to those for Jim Douglas in the Northeast Kingdom, for example).

I don't doubt that there are people, some of whom post here, who find that the liberalizing trend of Vermont politics has been bad for the state. I think they are wrong. Nevertheless, that is not due to Bernie's influence as much as it is to population change over the last fifty-sixty years and, even more, to the changes in the Legislature brought about by the one man, one vote principle established by Baker v. Carr. There may be people who dislike that change, but the idea that the town of Somerset, population 5, should have the same vote in the Legislature as the city of Burlington, population 38,889, is palpably absurd.