European Socialist/Progressive here. I feel your pain, but it's probably better that a progressive legislature doesn't just steamroll a Republican governor. Vermonters knew that when they were voting for Scott, they were voting for someone who wouldn't always agree with the legislature. That's his mandate, in a sense. If the legislature doesn't, to some degree, respect that (even though they too have a collective mandate) my fear is that it will backfire on them. If I were to speculate, I would say that Vermonters want a progressive state and legislature because we're largely (the majority) socially liberal, environmentally aware, determinedly secular and feel that the state is in better hands with Democrats and Progressives as regards those issues. We know we don't want the inane, race-baiting and big-government church & state Republicanism (and tax give-aways) that's poisoning the rest of the country; but that doesn't mean Vermonters want social programs without an awareness of their cost. And so we elect Scott as governor. We want a progressive Mommy with a fiscally conservative Daddy (as George Lakoff might put it). If the legislature is going to overrule Scott, it should be carefully considered and with a mind toward the mandate given to Scott.

He races cars good

I also found this baffling, but after talking to my less plugged in neighbors, I think there are two big factors at play.

First, Vermonters, and Americans in general, culturally value judging an individual based on their own merits. Scott has come out against Trump and doesn't act like the nutso Republicans. I think regular people really respect that even though it's misguided, since his affiliation with all those lunatics is entirely voluntary. People say things like "you can't judge him based on his party," when judging people by the company they choose to keep is actually such commonplace advice it's even a common idiom across several languages ("a man is judged by the company he keeps " in English; "Dime con quien andas y te diré quien eres" in Spanish).

In fact, it's not just voluntary; it's strategic and mutually beneficial. He shares campaigning resources with other Vermont GOP politicians as well as national Republican governors. He attends fundraising events with the Desantis and Abbot. Organizations like the Republican Governor's Association put money into his campaigns because they know Scott can raise funds from donors that would never go near someone like Noem. His very presence at these kinds of fundraisers launders the image of the entire party.

Second, I think he plays into a common American fear. Vermonters know what policies would make our lives better, and we elect legislators who support those things. But every time in all of American history someone has pushed for social progress, businesses tell us that it might force them to lay off workers. They say it'll cost jobs. It's a threat. We've internalized this threat so much that I think we're afraid of progress. We're afraid of it even though we don't need to be. Literally the entire rest of the world has paid family leave, and they're all super happy with it. Every other developed nation has single payer healthcare and much affordable or free higher education. We know what we need to do, but we're too afraid to do it, so we elect Scott. He vetoes paid family leave, higher minimum wage, etc., with his Uncle Phil demeanor and tut-tuts about fiscal responsibility. It plays directly our fear and we absolutely eat up the "bipartisanship" of it all, especially since people see him as someone who has proven himself by rejecting Trump and such.

I think a lot of Clinton liberals get off on occasionally voting for a moderate Republican so that they can claim bipartisanship and feel morally superior as a result.

He was good with covid so forget housing, min wage, jobs, child care...

He's safe with repubs cause hes not blue and he's safe with dems cause he won't disrupt the wealthy ones lives by helping poors.

Edit* just so theres no confusion I was making fun a dems voting for him even tho he did absolutely fuck all for them other than the bare minimum for covid.

I honestly don't understand either. "Useless" is a lot better than what can be said about the rest of his party, but he hasn't actually accomplished anything.

What’s the alternative?

Edit: Who is the alternative to Scott?

No competitive opposition, he’s broadly popular, so serious potential opponents are just waiting and saving their political capital for later, when they think they’d have a chance

As someone who voted for Scott and for Ds for every other election, I feel like Scott works like a filter, I don't want every single fashionable idea on Twitter to become government policy. Rent control is a terrible idea, Scott was right to veto it. Making heating more expensive during a fuel shortage is a bad idea. Letting a cleaver wielding murdering psychopath go free was a bad idea. How does someone walking through downtown not see Burlington as its own entity, it's not the rest of Vermont.

To be honest, he's been doing a decent job, and most of the democratic candidates have frankly not been my cup of tea.

Is there a reason he shouldn't be governor?

Actually, better question -- what do you think a governor does?

Listed to a recent interview and he talked about being surprised at the poverty he saw when traveling around. Like motherfucker, you’ve been governor for how many years now?

"Can you try to answer honestly?"

Really?

Quite frankly I'm still wondering why anyone could in good conscience could be a democrat? Republicans are Not good ether but no where near as batshit crazy as democrats. Scott is mainly a Democrat he really should just switch sides. I think that is why he gets elected he's a yes man but has just a sliver of decency and will not go along with some of the more outrageous crap Dems come up with. I think they let him win so it will keep the real people in the country pacified cause he's got a R but he also keeps the city folk pacified cause he's mainly a dem.

Because he’s the best choice. Usually if he vetoed something he had a good reason for it. He is a Vermonter and continues to try and keep those Vermont values that he believes in. 🤷🏻‍♂️. It seems to me that he will listen to both sides of the aisle. What’s wrong with him? He’s not a republican? Come on really? Maybe some of you should be a little more open minded like him. Let’s work together and find some common ground.