I went to the DC for Democracy (DCFD) meeting at Ben’s Chili Bowl last night, where a vote on endorsement of a presidential candidate took place. These events are almost always contentious, and it’s the first time the group has had to face the prospect of endorsing a candidate for president (the group evolved out of DC for Dean, the DC grassroots wing of Howard Dean’s campaign in 2003-04).
This was also the first test of the revised candidate endorsement process, one that uses a modified version of instant-runoff voting (IRV). This was put into place at last month’s meeting as a way to try and grease the wheels of endorsement: the group seldom even came up with the requisite votes (a 2/3 majority of ballots cast) to endorse a candidate or ballot initiative. With IRV, the chances of endorsing a candidate are, indeed, increased, but at what cost? I went into this at length last month, prior to the vote that brought IRV into the organization.
Tonight was the first test of IRV. My reaction?
It was a disorganized circus that played into the hands of DCFD’s steering committee: their “golden boy” candidate, Barack Obama, won endorsement by the thinnest possible margin: one vote. This after multiple rounds of counting and re-counting ballots as candidates were eliminated.
It was, to say the least, farcical.
And with this endorsement, my tenure as a regular at DCFD meetings and events comes to an end.
And it’s a sad moment for me.
I no longer identify with the organization. While I still like and respect many members of the group, it’s just not the DCFD I helped establish back in 2004, or for which I served as it’s IT chair not once, but twice.
(And to be fair: I’m not wholly disappointed in who DCFD endorsed. I’m just not leaning toward said candidate at this juncture.)
The current administration runs in very different circles than did the previous iterations of the executive board, and I’m just not on the same wavelength any more. The current style of leadership is much more “top-down,” but lacks the focus, tact, and inclusive nature that used to be a very unique and attractive aspect of DCFD.
Perhaps I’ve changed. I know that DCFD has changed.
So let’s just call it irreconcilable differences.
