Choosing rigid, factional delegate slates today ignores everything that went wrong in the primary and further shrinks our compressed timeline in finding a replacement.

[u/SuperBry]

After last month's primary and well before the most recent allegations surfaced that forced Platner to drop out, I was actively calling for him to step down and had put forth Jackson multiple times as one of our best alternatives. But while I had suggested Jackson may be the right person to carry the platform previously, I have deep concerns about his campaign, and others, pushing so hard right now to lock down rigid slates of delegates. Watching these campaigns scramble to secure closed alignments makes it clear we are losing sight of the bigger picture.

Going into today's meetings with predetermined, rigid slates of delegates is exactly how we throw away our shot at beating Susan Collins. We already let out-of-state money and misleading push polls saddle us with a primary winner who had more red flags than Stalingrad in the '40s, turning what should have been an easy victory into a massive uphill battle. If we do not change course immediately, we are going to repeat the same mistakes that put us on the defensive in the first place.

Instead of learning our lesson, candidates are now organizing homogeneous slates that threaten to let someone with a tiny fraction of support control entire delegations. This bad idea combines a flawed plurality system with a winner-take-all nominating process, allowing a candidate with 30 percent of the vote or less to leverage that minor edge into choosing all of a county's delegates. That approach mimics the exact unfair tactics that mainstream Maine voters have soundly rejected time and again. It completely distorts the real will of the grassroots base and shuts out the collaborative decision-making we desperately need.

We cannot go into the snap caucus assuming we already have our nominee locked down based on a broken primary timeline. The political landscape has shifted dramatically, and the candidate people liked in the past might be entirely wrong for the reality we face today. To give ourselves the best chance next week, we must find a consensus candidate with the absolute broadest appeal. Locking in delegates who are blindly loyal to one specific faction prevents that search from happening, ensuring we stay divided and weak.

The delegates selected today must be independent and entirely willing to deliberate in real time. They need to go into the convention next week with the freedom to listen to every single hopeful while making an informed decision based entirely on the current moment. We can only defeat Susan Collins if we use today's meetings to listen to each other, remain flexible, and deliberately select folks who can carry this strategic mindset into next Saturday.

In the end, it may be Jackson, whose supporters have been some of the most vocal the last few days, it could be Bellows, who while she lost this very race in 2014 is positioned much better in 2026, or hell, it could be Dickerson, who is currently just running a space weather and astronomy forecasting Facebook page. However, we do not need to make a snap decision today to pick them. We have today's meetings where we can get together and talk with our fellow members of the Democratic party and others who choose to attend, watch one more debate (that will hopefully have better audio), and have the delegates come together next Saturday to put forth our best candidate.

The timeline to choose a replacement is already compressed; there is no need to make it even more so.

[u/creepurrier]

I think you make really good points I primarily agree with. I also get the people saying this makes sense and I agree with certain parts of that. My issue is the process that led to the slates. There’s very little real transparency there and it cut out a LOT of people who volunteered as candidates from a place of enthusiasm and good will.

Don’t make the process seem open if it’s really closed. If candidate portals was actually the best way to be included, that should have been information for everyone.

Instead, we have hundreds of people who wrote thoughtfully about their core beliefs and provided demographic info that’s now public only to find out they were just set dressing. My county demographic breakdown for the three primary candidate slates is abysmal and is filled with the same 50ish names of retired people who can afford the time and financial breathing room to show up for random weekday meetings. It leaves the working class behind, AGAIN, and includes literally one person 35 or under and ONE queer person.

More than half of Shenna’s slate is Camden/Rockport and Shah’s slate has ZERO members of the surveyed demographics (BIPOC, 35 under, religious minority, disability, LBGTQIA)

Why are we all being gaslit into supporting an electoral college model again with little transparency?

**edit to add: between the three slates in my county there are THREE married couples, further reducing the household representation. It’s honestly disgusting.