A brief note, but a serious one. Stop the whining about the supermajority threshold of 60% to get an endorsement. Because seriously: when you start whining, you open yourself up to complete ridicule from people like me who actually know what the party bylaws (warning: PDF) say about the matter–specifically, Article VIII, Section 2, paragraph c, subparagraph (8):
Endorsement of an incumbent candidate seeking reelection shall require a vote of simple majority of the caucus members present and voting. Endorsement of all non-incumbent candidates shall require sixty percent (60%) of those caucus members present and voting.
This special protection for incumbent candidates is, of course, the only exception to the 60% threshold in the entire bylaws that govern the endorsement process. And for the record, it’s the only thing that allowed Senator Migden to get the endorsement recommendation last year, because she only got 55%. So, the 60% threshold for propositions is far from being a “quirk” in the process. It’s a feature, not a bug, and it’s the norm for all but one class of endorsements the CDP makes. And to those who have been going around talking as if it’s a bug—you’re lying. You wanted it to be this way because you thought it served your own interests. Sometimes, though, the rules do have a strange way of working against you.
Even Cheneyesque fearmongering isn’t getting the Yes on 1A campaign’s poll numbers above the freezing mark, so what else have they got? They’re so desperate, they might as well try having the party establishment schreech “I’m a victim of the party establishment’s rules.”
Why don’t you come to your senses / you’ve been out riding fences for so long now . . .
How certain people who have been extremely active for years and years in the party act as though they were blindsided by the 60% requirement. Also kinda funny how this hasn’t been enough of a concern to those people in years past to complain or take action towards change.
I’m no fan of the 60 percent rule. Nor of party candidate endorsements (why we support one Democrat over another I don’t know; I think voters ought to decide that themselves).
What I’ve pointed out is the irony of the same folks attacking the 2/3 budget requirement defending the 60 percent threshold saying a higher threshold is needed to express the conviction of the party and other crazy stuff.
I mean, let’s face it. All the Props had majority support, a few of them were endorsed, and the big one was supported by a whopping 58 percent. If there’s anyone using the rules for their spin advantage, it’s folks who get 42 percent of the vote and declare it a “win.”
Facts are stubborn things: the overwhelming number of Dems at the convention supported the Props.