I will make this clear right up front - I support Warren. I want her to win every single one of these polls. I vote every time I can.
I do that with the full knowledge that the poll is a straw poll, unscientific, self-selecting!
This Diary might not be very highly thought of here and I don’t feel too good about making it my first diary since ’16 on this particular topic. I think (hope) I will have something to share with the community that is more constructive than this. However, sometimes you don’t get to choose what is going to move you to speak up. So for better or worse, the manner in which DKos has chosen to tabulate votes in the DKos straw poll has moved me to speak up.
And okay, I get it - this is hardly the earth-shattering topic of the day.
Having said all of the above, I think it is something to write about, something that deserves discussion because I want to open the tent. Every single hallowed place of progressive ground, be it on this planet or on “virtual” ground, I want to be open for all comers. As LBJ put crudely, I’d rather have them in the tent, pissing out, than outside the tent, pissing in.
So here are my thoughts concerning the straw poll tabulation and specifically on the systematic exclusion of the YangGang votes.
To repeat:
I support Warren. I want her to win every single one of these polls. I vote on the poll every time I can. I appreciate these polls even knowing it’s just a straw poll, unscientific, self-selecting (I hear an echo).
But I object. I don’t want to “win” like this.
I don’t want to “win” like this because this is undemocratic.
The vote tabulation policy discourages, disillusions and disenfranchises real users who took the time to sign up. And arguing about this is tiring and exasperating to those of us that have to read through pointless pie fights such as the one which dominated the thread in the wake of Kos’ summary of the most recent straw poll results.
How does this policy differ from exactly what we Democrats fight against every single day - suppressing votes, purging voters, choosing the electorate?
How is it not clear that this fits perfectly into a ridiculous “fake news” mantra? Can it be honestly claimed, with a straight face, that the results printed are “the truth”, given a policy that has suppressed the voices of every single Yang voter? Does anyone honestly believe that every one of those votes came from a bot and/or was a phony vote?
Given the broadcasted claim that these folk are “phony”, then DKos should show the math. I’d very much like to see the logic which determined “real” or “fake” voters. Absent proof, this voter suppression is not only weak, but I would also argue that it is damaging to the DKos site and to our collective, progressive, causes. We can do better and we should.
If there is a sentiment that the YangGang is not represented by real people, that what they show in the poll is not in good faith, then challenge them to join in. Open the virtual door, invite them into the virtual space and ask that they join in the conversation - don’t shut them out!
One thing is certain. Yang’s crowds are real — it is not holograms attending his speeches and rallies. His donations are real. His qualification for the debates via the established DNC criteria of polling results and donations - that is real also. If the DNC can welcome his voice and the voice of his supporters, then so too should DKos.
Look - if the site policy is to restrict voting to members, then so be it - but why not give everyone an opportunity to vote?
- Require site registration with two-factor-authentication.
- Require 14 days of membership.
- Require 25 “real” comments (of greater than a 2-word “I agree” length).
- You could even require 2FA for the actual voting — at least for the straw poll.
I suppose if you really wanted to be restrictive, you could limit voting to Trusted Users, but I would argue that’s counter to whatever motivation there might be to drive new members to the site.
One of the reasons I enjoy the straw polls is I just appreciate the informal counting of noses. But another reason is that I like the discussion. Mostly, I lurk, although lately, I’ve been increasingly inclined to speak up in defense of my candidate (Liz). Yet what has been done with the policy recently had the effect of blowing up the comments section and morphing it into a non-stop pie fight regarding this mid-guided policy. Was that the intent?
In summary:
- We should welcome Yang voters. Instead, the policy chases them away.
- The policy sends a wrong message about the site and its members. It’s not a policy that represents me, that’s for sure.
- It sure as hell is not representative of the mindset of the average progressive who I believe is supportive of inclusion and in opposition to suppression.
- I miss when comments were more about pluses and minuses of the candidates than about alleged rigging of the vote results.
- I suggest that DKos reconsider the policy, fess up to its flaws and find a better way. It is not helpful, it is not constructive, it is not inclusive, it is not even pleasant.
In closing - I believe that someday in the not-too-distant future, Elizabeth Warren will emerge as the strongest candidate and eventual nominee. If not her, then perhaps Biden or Pete or Amy, Kamala, Cory. Possibly it will be someone I’ve not mentioned (or even considered yet). Repeating - I am confident in Liz but feel I must acknowledge that other possibilities exist.
Possibly (I don’t think it to be likely, but again feel I should acknowledge the possibility) - possibly that other candidate will be Andrew Yang.
Regardless of how it resolves - and resolve it will - I’d feel better about being a small part of a vocal community that believed in working together as a community, that made decisions and established guidelines in the best interests supporting the growth of the community and that never - never - chased away folk who share our collective progressive beliefs.
I’d like to feel that the policies of the site are reflective of a favorable disposition towards inclusion, participation, dialog which is encouraging of all voices.
It’s a big tent - or at least it should be. I respectfully suggest that the powers-that-be here at DKos come up with a better way to demonstrate that it is a welcome - and united - tent. The PTB should find a better way to count the votes - and count every single one of them.