http://www.scc.net/~t-bonham/MPLSCITY.HTM, for those who want to look at the details.)
Essentially, the convention was pretty much deadlocked all day. Over all the ballots, there was a variation of only 5% (easily within the margin of error had this been a poll). Sayles-Beltons highest was a 3.7% lead over RT, his highest was a 1.4% lead over her. Neither had any significant lead at any time. And the changes were getting smaller with each vote. There was a slight trend toward RT, but it was decreasing as undecided delegates disappeared and each side was left with their solidly committed delegates.
In my opinion (as head teller at this convention, and at many others previously), more ballots would not have seen any significant change, just an even clearer deadlock.
RT was gaining every ballot, but so was Sayles-Belton. But neither of them ever reached 50%.
Neither side had any significant numbers of delegates coming or leaving. The last ballot had 93% of the delegates still there and voting, over 8 hours after the start of the convention.
Neither side made a "no endorsement" motion; that never happened. The convention was ended by a motion to adjourn, which was made jointly by people from both campaigns, and supported by both.
Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson
RT is indeed correct. He did not block DFL endorsement. He actually would have won the DFL endorsement had it gone a couple of more rounds. We had the commanding lead, we had more delegates coming, and Sharon's delegates were leaving. . . . Jim Graham, Ventura Village
IIRC, it was the Sayles-Belton campaign that moved for no
endorsement. R.T. was gaining on every ballot and had passed 50%- I
wish we'd have kept on balloting and delivered an endorsement.
. . .
Dyna Sluyter, disenfranchised in Hawthorne
_______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
