Just for purposes of fair disclosure, I supported RT at the convention and will
continue to do so.

Many of Peter's supporters on this list have repeatedly pointed out that Peter's
margin increased on each of the five ballots taken, the implication being that
the delegates were turning to Peter en masse and away from RT, that this
process would have continued leading to inevitable endorsement for Peter, but
for the RT delegate walkout.

But a more careful analysis tells a somewhat different story.  Look at the raw
numbers in addition to the percentages.  In every ballot after the second
ballot, both Peter AND RT lost votes in absolute terms (there was a bump on the
second ballot because the 3 other candidates were dropped after the first
ballot).  RT lost more than Peter on each ballot, giving Peter a greater
percentage of the total.

I don't think Peter's increasing lead came from any significant number of folks
changing their vote.  I personally didn't hear of any defections from EITHER
side - despite the untiring efforts of the headset crowd and the candidates
themselves.  I think the increasing lead was the result of people leaving - and
Peter's people simply hung around longer, either because his campaign had better
discipline or because the Peter supporters tended to be the veterans who have
seen a lot of 2 am conventions so were wise enough not to make dinner plans.

This goes to my earlier post about the endorsement process.  Do we really want
to endorse someone because they can better survive a 13 hour convention and
hold their delegates in their seats longer than the other guy?  I don't.

I like the Linda Higgins idea of looking for some sort of electronic instant
voting mechanism for next time.  That would give us the ability to make
rational decisions about whether to change horses to obtain the benefit of an
endorsement without requiring us to sit in crappy chairs for half of a precious
weekend.  I also think we should have endorsed them both and let the voters
decide.

Barry Clegg
Nicollet Island

REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to