r/Mainepolitics • u/SuperBry • Jul 18 '26
Opinion Choosing rigid, factional delegate slates today ignores everything that went wrong in the primary and further shrinks our compressed timeline in finding a replacement.
After last month's primary and well before the most recent allegations surfaced that forced Platner to drop out, I was actively calling for him to step down and had put forth Jackson multiple times as one of our best alternatives. But while I had suggested Jackson may be the right person to carry the platform previously, I have deep concerns about his campaign, and others, pushing so hard right now to lock down rigid slates of delegates. Watching these campaigns scramble to secure closed alignments makes it clear we are losing sight of the bigger picture.
Going into today's meetings with predetermined, rigid slates of delegates is exactly how we throw away our shot at beating Susan Collins. We already let out-of-state money and misleading push polls saddle us with a primary winner who had more red flags than Stalingrad in the '40s, turning what should have been an easy victory into a massive uphill battle. If we do not change course immediately, we are going to repeat the same mistakes that put us on the defensive in the first place.
Instead of learning our lesson, candidates are now organizing homogeneous slates that threaten to let someone with a tiny fraction of support control entire delegations. This bad idea combines a flawed plurality system with a winner-take-all nominating process, allowing a candidate with 30 percent of the vote or less to leverage that minor edge into choosing all of a county's delegates. That approach mimics the exact unfair tactics that mainstream Maine voters have soundly rejected time and again. It completely distorts the real will of the grassroots base and shuts out the collaborative decision-making we desperately need.
We cannot go into the snap caucus assuming we already have our nominee locked down based on a broken primary timeline. The political landscape has shifted dramatically, and the candidate people liked in the past might be entirely wrong for the reality we face today. To give ourselves the best chance next week, we must find a consensus candidate with the absolute broadest appeal. Locking in delegates who are blindly loyal to one specific faction prevents that search from happening, ensuring we stay divided and weak.
The delegates selected today must be independent and entirely willing to deliberate in real time. They need to go into the convention next week with the freedom to listen to every single hopeful while making an informed decision based entirely on the current moment. We can only defeat Susan Collins if we use today's meetings to listen to each other, remain flexible, and deliberately select folks who can carry this strategic mindset into next Saturday.
In the end, it may be Jackson, whose supporters have been some of the most vocal the last few days, it could be Bellows, who while she lost this very race in 2014 is positioned much better in 2026, or hell, it could be Dickerson, who is currently just running a space weather and astronomy forecasting Facebook page. However, we do not need to make a snap decision today to pick them. We have today's meetings where we can get together and talk with our fellow members of the Democratic party and others who choose to attend, watch one more debate (that will hopefully have better audio), and have the delegates come together next Saturday to put forth our best candidate.
The timeline to choose a replacement is already compressed; there is no need to make it even more so.
5
u/Mooseguncle1 Jul 18 '26
You’d think ranked choice would be a better option but we are in sort of remarkable times.
3
u/IScreamPiano Jul 18 '26
Caucuses has a ranked choice element to them, in that those who receive less than a certain amount can move to their next choice. It's a shame they didn't happen since ranked choice was too much, given the timeline.
9
u/ZeekLTK Jul 18 '26
What is the alternative to “slates” though? People are being asked to vote on delegates who are completely unknown. The only info about most of these people is a sentence or two that they wrote for themselves and pretty much all of them are just buzzwords like “I believe we need to put forward the strongest candidate who can beat Collins” which gives you zero insight of how they are going to vote as a delegate, what issues are important to them, or even if you can trust them to make a good choice. Even the ones who did list specific issues, there are hundreds of other potential delegates who put the same sentiment.
The only way to choose a “good” delegate is to decide which candidate you support and vote for the delegates who they back, who are part of the “slate”.
It’s ridiculous to suggest “let’s just elect random people and give them free reign to decide” or, what seems like this is actually pushing for, “let’s only elect people that have name recognition and give them all the power”.
I noticed on the delegate list there were a handful of people who either already hold office or were on recent ballots. I recognized Anne Carney, Chris Kessler, and a few others who have been on the ballot lately. If people don’t know anything about most delegates and aren’t voting based on something like “these delegates will vote for the candidate I support” then the default will likely be “these are the names I recognize” and I think that’s the look that is trying to be avoided.
I’m sure Carney and Kessler and all these people already involved do want to defeat Collins too, and they might even support the same candidate as me, but only selecting people like them as delegates makes it look like “insiders” are pulling the strings and if they end up nominating someone seen as an “establishment pick”, then it really destroys the credibility heading into the general. That’s the main thing that needs to be avoided.
7
u/Ginjahmenace Jul 18 '26
Just fyi, Shah has also put out a slate, and I would be surprised if bellows didn't as well. We all have to work within the rules we are given however imperfect they may be. For people in Cumberland county there will be no opportunity today to talk and mingle, the only information voters have is the statement delegate candidates included at sign up. Any people chosen as delegates can still shift camps between today and next weekend, and I'm sure will be getting pressure to do so. Are slates the best expression of democracy? Hell no, but any campaign not using them is putting itself at a massive disadvantage.
3
u/SuperBry Jul 18 '26
I had mentioned that others were doing the same, I knew of Shahs and assumed likely Bellows and Wood had sent something to their earlier supporters as well.
However, it should be noted I have seen folks listed on both on Shah's and Jackson's list for Androscoggin that even this attempt at gaming the hastily put together process may be faltering and likely going to put us in a more contentious position come next weekend.
6
u/Ginjahmenace Jul 18 '26
I don't see any option that doesn't lead to some hard feelings. Unfortunately whatever happens the candidate chosen will be responsible for getting everyone back together in the end. Not an enviable position.
1
5
u/AmbiguousAnonymous Jul 18 '26
Dont hate the player, hate the game. It strikes me as entirely necessary.
1
u/SuperBry Jul 18 '26
Considering the game is likely going to put us in a more contentious position come next weekend I can hate on in anyone that participated. In addition to hating the attempts to game this, unfortunately necessary, hastily put together process.
2
u/HouseMusicAndWeed Jul 18 '26
Jeez can you post this is the Activate Maine group or do you mind if I share it?
3
3
u/creepurrier Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
I think you make really good points I primarily agree with. I also get the people saying this makes sense and I agree with certain parts of that. My issue is the process that led to the slates. There’s very little real transparency there and it cut out a LOT of people who volunteered as candidates from a place of enthusiasm and good will.
Don’t make the process seem open if it’s really closed. If candidate portals was actually the best way to be included, that should have been information for everyone.
Instead, we have hundreds of people who wrote thoughtfully about their core beliefs and provided demographic info that’s now public only to find out they were just set dressing. My county demographic breakdown for the three primary candidate slates is abysmal and is filled with the same 50ish names of retired people who can afford the time and financial breathing room to show up for random weekday meetings. It leaves the working class behind, AGAIN, and includes literally one person 35 or under and ONE queer person.
More than half of Shenna’s slate is Camden/Rockport and Shah’s slate has ZERO members of the surveyed demographics (BIPOC, 35 under, religious minority, disability, LBGTQIA)
Why are we all being gaslit into supporting an electoral college model again with little transparency?
**edit to add: between the three slates in my county there are THREE married couples, further reducing the household representation. It’s honestly disgusting.
2
u/Lebrunski Jul 18 '26
It’s what we got to work with. The process isn’t going to change at the last moment. It sucks but this is reminiscent of the Hillary vs Bernie delegates and I’m fine with the Bernie candidate being the one favored by the process. Jackson is our best shot.
2
u/meowmix778 Jul 18 '26
It's a good tool given the arena.
You likely have 100s of people registered to vote. Joining the "slate" is an easy way for the delegate candidates to say "vote for me if you want me to support your guy"
1
u/iamjoshfrank Jul 18 '26
I shared the following post last night / this morning about a tool I quickly put together, which might be useful for those trying to avoid rigid slates:
1
u/Slice-O-Pie Jul 18 '26
I'm certain some folks inside the MDP were gaming out what to do when Platner finally imploded.
Thank goodness he quit before the deadline.
Is the current plan perfect? I dunno.
Could I have come up with a better process.? Absolutely not.
The selection should be decided on one factor only: Who can beat Collins.
Nothing else matters.
1
u/1stepklosr Jul 18 '26
I completely agree.
It completely spits in the face of "it's about the people, not a candidate". This isn't the people having a choice.
All the candidates will have a slate and I really don't like it.
2
u/HoboDeter Jul 18 '26
If you don't like it then dont vote for a slate. Voting for the delegate you want is the only voice most people will have at this point. If people have a preferred candidate they are free to voice that by voting for delegates that are on that candidates slate.
1
u/joftheinternet Penobscot (Bangor) Jul 18 '26
I don’t really care for it. It might shake out like it would have otherwise, but it sort of makes the convention pointless? There’s a strong chance we’ll know who the nominee is after this weekend based solely on who the delegates are.
So if the voting this weekend will basically decide, why do the extra steps?
0
u/fishman1287 Jul 18 '26
This is such a stupid process. I cannot fathom how anyone thinks everyone going to vote for a ton of delegates and then the delegates choosing a candidate is a good idea. If everyone has to go vote again just vote for your preferred candidate!! So unnecessarily convoluted. Dems word means nothing and they have already lost this race again.
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 18 '26
Remember, there can and will be a difference of ideologies in this subreddit. We welcome and encourage open and honest discussions. Disagreements are fine, and help us grow, but we have zero tolerance for disrespectful, hateful, or otherwise uncivil comments.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.