Tom- I could be convinced that I am wrong, but right now I am gratified that the DPG has gotten behind one of the 4 candidates for PSC District 3. I am also surprised - Dems are usually so meek and rule following and afraid to offend anyone. We need to toughen up and make hard choices - this race will be extremely difficult to win and would be much more difficult if we sat out for the next 2.5 months.
Do we want the state committee to try and point to a candidate in each and every state level race? What are the criteria in which we want that to happen? There are certainly times in which this action is justified, I just don't think this race is one of them. The other candidates are Democrats, two of the four have political experience, three of the four have business or life experience in the type of topics PSC covers. Fundraising capability is very important, but I think that's a consideration we should allow primary voters to decide upon. I don't want the state committee trying to do this every single time.
I think Dems have to be more flexible, less "rule-following", and willing to make tough decisions when they are needed to win an election. I think this situation meets the moment. This race is very important to all Georgians, especially the poor, and will take everything we have to win since the education lift is so heavy and the time so short. Daniel has run this statewide race before and gotten to a runoff. Other other candidates are qualified and great people but the only chance we have of winning this is to start strong NOW. Happy to hear the views of others.
I understand your reasoning, but just ask yourself are "we" who are in the inner circle or somewhat in the inner circle...is it up to "we" to direct everyone else all the time? During the executive meeting session, the first vote taken on this failed by one vote. Someone wanted to voted on it again...ok, they voted again. Initially, it was exactly the same vote as the first time, one vote short. But someone had noticed that two people on the call, two executive committee members, hadn't voted either time. They either weren't watching, were asleep, on the phone with someone else, on the internet, TV...whatever...they weren't paying attention. Someone got to them (presumably by phone or text) and prodded them to vote 'yes' and push the total over the 2/3 point by two votes.
So, the two least informed, least interested people on the executive committee ended up deciding on the endorsement motion. Does that sound like the level of expertise we can trust from the inner circle of our party in every single case?
Tom, thank you for this. I’m working with a group in Hall County and have found your candidate interviews invaluable to helping form my opinion on who will receive my vote. I can tell the executive committee that given what I heard in the interviews, their chosen candidate is not my candidate of choice. To try to shove all the Democrats into one box is a huge mistake. Trying to wipe out votes for the other three candidates certainly gives me less faith in their leadership.
Pam, I am also looking for a candidate who, when elected, has a chance to be heard by other commission members. This is an important election, but historically, voter turnout is very low for this type of election. Bottom line, outside of the party itself, none of these candidates are known. Our job is to educate, not legislate. It’s the party’s job to make sure the public knows as much as possible about all four candidates. It’s time to take our fixation off of the circus in Washington and support our candidates- all of them. That is what democracy looks like.
You're welcome. I'm glad the state committee withdrew the proposal to endorse a candidate. Feel free to link my stuff on social media or your website at will.
Tom- I could be convinced that I am wrong, but right now I am gratified that the DPG has gotten behind one of the 4 candidates for PSC District 3. I am also surprised - Dems are usually so meek and rule following and afraid to offend anyone. We need to toughen up and make hard choices - this race will be extremely difficult to win and would be much more difficult if we sat out for the next 2.5 months.
Do we want the state committee to try and point to a candidate in each and every state level race? What are the criteria in which we want that to happen? There are certainly times in which this action is justified, I just don't think this race is one of them. The other candidates are Democrats, two of the four have political experience, three of the four have business or life experience in the type of topics PSC covers. Fundraising capability is very important, but I think that's a consideration we should allow primary voters to decide upon. I don't want the state committee trying to do this every single time.
I think Dems have to be more flexible, less "rule-following", and willing to make tough decisions when they are needed to win an election. I think this situation meets the moment. This race is very important to all Georgians, especially the poor, and will take everything we have to win since the education lift is so heavy and the time so short. Daniel has run this statewide race before and gotten to a runoff. Other other candidates are qualified and great people but the only chance we have of winning this is to start strong NOW. Happy to hear the views of others.
I understand your reasoning, but just ask yourself are "we" who are in the inner circle or somewhat in the inner circle...is it up to "we" to direct everyone else all the time? During the executive meeting session, the first vote taken on this failed by one vote. Someone wanted to voted on it again...ok, they voted again. Initially, it was exactly the same vote as the first time, one vote short. But someone had noticed that two people on the call, two executive committee members, hadn't voted either time. They either weren't watching, were asleep, on the phone with someone else, on the internet, TV...whatever...they weren't paying attention. Someone got to them (presumably by phone or text) and prodded them to vote 'yes' and push the total over the 2/3 point by two votes.
So, the two least informed, least interested people on the executive committee ended up deciding on the endorsement motion. Does that sound like the level of expertise we can trust from the inner circle of our party in every single case?
I say no.
Tom, thank you for this. I’m working with a group in Hall County and have found your candidate interviews invaluable to helping form my opinion on who will receive my vote. I can tell the executive committee that given what I heard in the interviews, their chosen candidate is not my candidate of choice. To try to shove all the Democrats into one box is a huge mistake. Trying to wipe out votes for the other three candidates certainly gives me less faith in their leadership.
Pam, I am also looking for a candidate who, when elected, has a chance to be heard by other commission members. This is an important election, but historically, voter turnout is very low for this type of election. Bottom line, outside of the party itself, none of these candidates are known. Our job is to educate, not legislate. It’s the party’s job to make sure the public knows as much as possible about all four candidates. It’s time to take our fixation off of the circus in Washington and support our candidates- all of them. That is what democracy looks like.
You're welcome. I'm glad the state committee withdrew the proposal to endorse a candidate. Feel free to link my stuff on social media or your website at will.