Although I appreciate the clarity on what the term "non-partisan" refers to
in Minneapolis' system of elections, I think that Tamir Nolley's primary
concern was overlooked. As I read it, I think he also wanted to point out
the pitfalls of partisan POLITICS.
Let me point out that I am a strong supporter of the Green Party and its Ten
Key Values, and I am working hard to help build the party. I am also
thrilled that the Sixth Ward has two thoughtful, progressive candidates in
Tamir and Dean Zimmerperson. Their participation will pump some much needed
dialogue into a city that has a very large population of disenfranchised
people.
Despite this, I am only loyal to the Green Party because it reflects my
personal values. I would never let my membership get in the way of working
with someone else, and I would cease to be a supporter if it no longer
addressed the needs of regular folks and the world around us.
I've seen it growing up, I saw it during the presidential campaign season,
and I see it on this list: People can become blinded by their party loyalty
and loose their common sense. Bickering occurs, as does jockeying for power.
When this happens, Jack & Jill Citizen begin to feel alienated.
Parties, in my opinion, can be helpful tools to help people come together
and practice the art of governing, but they have limits that many
politicians and activists stretch beyond anything that I am comfortable
with. I think these people would do well to ease up on their party loyalty,
and start focusing on the tasks of improving our democracy and building a
peaceful society.
Of course, this guy says it better than I: "There is an opinion, that
parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the
Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within
certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast,
Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of
party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely
elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency,
it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary
purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be,
by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be
quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a
flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume." -- George Washington
Eric Makela
Audubon Neighborhood
Minneapolis, Ward 1, Precinct 1
> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 11:52:26 -0600
> From: "Dean Zimmermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Tamir Nolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, " " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [Mpls] non-partisan?
>
> Lots of confusion about what is or is not a partisan and non-partisan
> primary election. A Partisan Primary Simply means that all of the DFL
> candidates run against each other to see who will represent the DFL in the
> General Election. Also, all of the Republican candidates run against each
> other to see who will represent the Republicans in the General Election.
> Also, all of the Green Party candidates run against each other to see who
> will represent the Green Party in the General Election. ETC. Also,
> candidates who do not belong to any party go directly to the General
> Election. A result of this type of election is that because there are so
> many people in the General Election, a person can get elected
> with much less
> than a Majority of the voters -- for example, Jesse Ventura got
> elected with
> something like 36% or 38% of the vote. (don't quote me on that percentage)
>
> A Non-Partisan Primary simply means that all candidates,
> regardless of what
> party they may or may not belong to, run against each other in one big
> showdown. Then the top two finishers run against each other in
> the General
> Election. The result of this type of election is that whoever is elected
> must get a majority of the votes. This could also mean, and often does in
> Mpls, that the General Election would have two DFLers running against each
> other. Or two of any other party.
<snip>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Tamir Nolley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 4:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Mpls] non-partisan?
>
> For all of the talk about the DFL v. the Greens. I
> would point out
> that there might be many smaller parties such as the Grassroots
> Party or the
> Socialist Workers Party who may be running candidates or
> supporting charter
> amendments this year. I'd like to see them do so.
> If this is supposed to be a non-partisan election, it doesn't
> really feel like it. On the list you can see a lot of partisan
> shots taken
> by people very committed to the parties they support, but
> sometimes in that
> debate the actual residents that those parties are trying to
> serve get lost
> in the whole discussion. Though I am a candidate seeking third party
> endorsements, I really like the idea of the non-partisan
> election. It forces
> each candidate to run on their issues and how they would best serve the
> city.
> I think the best candidates out there are populist and solution
> oriented and the weakest run on their personalities (i.e. "My name
> is........, I've done .... and .... for my community, I am....... and I
> am....... etc.) Our campaign, The Nolley Trolley, is a large
> group effort,
> so if I started doing that, for weeks I'd be hearing, "this is about more
> than just you!!!," And they'd be right.
> I know that the last election was very tense for many people, and
> that there are a lot of bitter feelings about it, But we can move beyond
> it. Remember, most Americans don't vote, and in the last
> election, about a
> third of Minneapolitans didn't either. Let's think of
> constructive ways to
> involve and engage people, not parties.
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
