Progressive Politics

3229 readers

1060 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world

818

Democrat reformists finding out that Democrats will only play dirty against the left. (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 weeks ago by geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world

366 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] illustriousPark265@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

From my understanding, this is not the fault of Fateh, but of the Democratic Party themselves [...]

This is what I said.

Claiming this is a valid reason to throw the entire victory of the democratic socialists overboard seems outrageous.

The reason it matters is because of the nature of successive rounds of voting. When the missing (~175 / 1000) votes got counted (in retrospect), it showed an additional candidate should have been included in the second round of voting. And the democratic leadership pushed ahead with the flawed second round of voting without addressing the problem. I don't remember all the details, but I believe the final vote also broke their own procedural requirements (in addition to Frey's delegates having already walked out in protest).

I don't know their procedures (and welcome a source/explanation), but clearly the absence of an endorsement since 2009 indicates it's not easy to get the endorsement, and having an additional candidate in the second round of voting certainly seems like it has the potential to reduce the chances of a candidate securing the endorsement. I think it's entirely reasonable, particularly in that context, to withdraw the endorsement.

Edit to add: I also agree that the primary/convention system, procedures, etc, probably do favor candidates supported by "the establishment".

[–] bananaa@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I can provide additional context as a convention attendee.

After the first round of voting, it was clear that Omar would have a majority. He earned 43% of the vote and other non-Frey voters were expected to vote Omar after seeing the results and knowing that 60% was needed for an endorsement.

At this point, Frey’s campaign started shenanigans that drew boos from the crowd. They called many times for rule changes and stall for time to prevent a second vote. Late into the night, Frey’s campaign went so far as to ask their delegates to go home to prevent a quorum.

Every deviation from convention rules was voted on and approved using procedure. Was it a shitshow? Yes. But in my view, it was done within the rules.

[–] illustriousPark265@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thank you!

According to what I read last week, they confirmed 176 of first-round votes weren't counted at the convention (thus, not reflected in the numbers from your photo). I didn't find a source explaining what the distribution of missing or adjusted final votes was, just that it would've pushed Davis onto at least the second round of voting, which would have made it more difficult for Fateh to secure the endorsement (for reasons I can speculate about but don't know).

I also subsequently found these two articles (first is short, second is extremely verbose) that provide additional color to the dysfunction.

Every deviation from convention rules was voted on and approved using procedure.

From the articles above, it sounds like some of those votes / rule changes violated the MN DFL constitution.