Reader Endorsements: Should we do it?
Over the past few days, we've been getting a number of e-mails from readers asking where our endorsements for the August 18th primary are.
I've been responding and letting people know that we've made a decision to exit the endorsements business because our objective as a strategy center is to advance the common good and build infrastructure for the progressive movement, not take sides in campaigns. Doing so makes bridge building more difficult.
Now, we'll still be staking out very strong positions on ballot measures, and our Permanent Defense project will continue to fight right wing initiatives. But we have decided to no longer endorse candidates for office.
With that said, the message we're getting from readers is that endorsements are very helpful when trying to decide who to vote for, and they serve a noble purpose. So how do we balance this need with our desire to focus our energy on our real mission? We think we've come up with a novel idea: Reader endorsements.
Instead of putting together endorsements ourselves, we are thinking of convening a five member panel of readers who have some experience in the trenches as activists... and have opinions about who should lead us into the next decade. This panel would meet online to share their thoughts and come up with a slate of candidates they recommend that fellow readers vote for, and we'd publish and disseminate those recommendations to all of our readers.
The recommendations wouldn't reflect the views of NPI's staff, but we think that would be a good thing. Our motto is revolutionizing grassroots politics, and this seems like a good way to shake things up... endorsements by our readers, for our readers. All we would do is facilitate the recommendations' creation; we would not influence what the picks are.
What we want to know is this: Should we do it? Take the poll:
(If you think it's a good idea, and you would like to volunteer to be on the panel, please drop us a line quickly and let us know.)
I've been responding and letting people know that we've made a decision to exit the endorsements business because our objective as a strategy center is to advance the common good and build infrastructure for the progressive movement, not take sides in campaigns. Doing so makes bridge building more difficult.
Now, we'll still be staking out very strong positions on ballot measures, and our Permanent Defense project will continue to fight right wing initiatives. But we have decided to no longer endorse candidates for office.
With that said, the message we're getting from readers is that endorsements are very helpful when trying to decide who to vote for, and they serve a noble purpose. So how do we balance this need with our desire to focus our energy on our real mission? We think we've come up with a novel idea: Reader endorsements.
Instead of putting together endorsements ourselves, we are thinking of convening a five member panel of readers who have some experience in the trenches as activists... and have opinions about who should lead us into the next decade. This panel would meet online to share their thoughts and come up with a slate of candidates they recommend that fellow readers vote for, and we'd publish and disseminate those recommendations to all of our readers.
The recommendations wouldn't reflect the views of NPI's staff, but we think that would be a good thing. Our motto is revolutionizing grassroots politics, and this seems like a good way to shake things up... endorsements by our readers, for our readers. All we would do is facilitate the recommendations' creation; we would not influence what the picks are.
What we want to know is this: Should we do it? Take the poll:
(If you think it's a good idea, and you would like to volunteer to be on the panel, please drop us a line quickly and let us know.)
# Posted by Andrew : 9:14 PM
Comments:
This might be interesting, if only to show a video of a deliberation between educated progressives stating why they support someone rather than just a "we support blah". The why is much more important than the name.
Post a Comment