The 5th Senatorial District Democratic Candidates’ Forum
It took place last night. Shout-outs to everybody involved in putting this together. At its peak, we had well over 60 attendees at this Zoom meeting, plus the technical staff who made it work. It was very-well run, co-hosted by NCC D Chair Kat Caudle and Wilmington D Chair Cassandra Marshall.
Four candidates are vying for the nomination. In alphabetical order: Shay Frisby, Dr. Bryan Haimes, Ray Siegfried, and Jonathan Tate. Each made an initial presentation, and then answered questions for close to 2 1/2 hours.
I wish Matt Meyer had been there, because he might well have changed his tune about how special elections should be run. The questions were almost uniformly good, and the answers cumulatively provided genuine insight into what each candidate would bring to the table. What you will have going into the selection of candidates on, or about, December 9 is an electorate well-informed about the candidates.
I admittedly have a strong favorite in this race, but I would encourage anybody who attended last night to share their thoughts on how the candidates did. BTW, several members of the Senate Democratic Caucus attended as guests.
I don’t much envy Kat and Cassandra. Because there are 11, count ’em, 11 announced candidates vying for the SD 1 seat currently held by Sarah McBride. So many candidates that they will hold two candidate forums, each with a different set of candidates.
There is one important question to which we’ve not received any answers: Will the vote be one ballot, most votes wins? Or will it be a series of ballots with those receiving the fewest votes dropping off? I believe that the nominee ultimately must receive over 50% of the votes. Otherwise, in the case of SD 5 (Kyle Evans Gay), someone could be the nominee having received less than 30%, making them more vulnerable to a Republican challenge in a district that, up until 2020, had a Republican senator in Cathy Cloutier.
In SD 1 (Sarah McBride), someone could win with less than 15% support. That doesn’t strike me as democratic or Democratic. Here’s hoping that the process is clarified in a way that will ensure Party unity during these Special Elections. In other words: Majority rules.
Let me just put this out in the universe…
Usually, this is done according to Robert’s Rules. This means that someone will make a motion to endorse (or whatever the nomenclature will be). There will be a vote. If this motion gets the majority of votes cast, the process is complete.
The key here is “votes cast”. If you want to vote for someone else, do not abstain or some other non-vote. Vote “no”.
10 no votes v. 9 yes votes, the motion fails.
2 no votes v. 4 yes votes and 13 abstentions, the motion passes and the process is complete and someone complains that their person was railroaded because they never got a vote.
I know that the chairwomen have tried to make that clear over the years, but people still abstain and wonder how they ended up in a sub-optimal situation.
I don’t like that approach. Seems much simpler to have selectors vote for their choice, and to then winnow the field down based on those receiving the fewest votes. Why confuse people with a procedure which, as you just pointed out, results in people being disenfranchised unintentionally?
Yes, it’s possible that someone will receive over 50% on the first ballot. In which case no further votes would be required.
Definitely can’t see that happening in SD 1, though. More likely is that all 11 motions to endorse would fail, and then where would you be?
To me, simpler is better.
To answer your question, there could be a motion to remove the candidate with the lowest number of votes from contention and restart the process.
I will say that I don’t have any particular insight into how the process will actually be conducted, but folks should be prepared.
It seems a little like Approval voting, but more public. Could they instead consider a private approval based vote (Y/N) for the candidates, and whoever gets the most Yes votes wins? Some might treat the vote like FPTP and only vote for one, but I’d hope most have multiple candidates they’d like enough to consider. Plus private voting might put less pressure on committee members to vote a certain way.
Don’t like this process. Seems icky.
Isn’t Tate the socialist dude?
I know Sigfried was in the House
Not a clue of the other 2 names
Siegfried had one term in the House. Won a five-way primary with 28.5% of the vote.
Was skunked by Larry Lambert in a two-person primary in 2020.