A Systematic Way for Democratic Voters To Give Leaders a Swift Kick in the Direction They Want Them To Go
Imagine with me for a minute (and then I’ll bring it down to reality, how this could happen) a huge portion of registered Democratic voters voting on a variety of choices as to how they would like the party leaders to campaign for the Congressional elections next year. Choices as to what policies, priorities, style, degree of boldness, or other aspects. Choices of how their voters want their leaders to go at these elections.
Further imagine that you can track, over the days or weeks of this voting, which choices are getting the most votes. And imagine that you can change your vote later if you want. Say your choice was to focus on the political middle, but as the votes come in more people want bigger change than that, and you decide you could go for that too so you change your vote to help promote that choice. Or your choice was to focus on lowering the cost of daily living, but more votes are going to a choice of focusing on raising pay of underpaid workers. You decide that would accomplish the same thing so you change your vote to promote that choice as it is rising toward the top.
What does that accomplish? I suspect what would rise to the top is marching orders, from Democratic voters, to Democratic leadership, that they want very bold style and action, and big changes that help typical citizens and average workers. In other words a way to create a bullhorn for Democratic voters to shout in the ears of leaders to do something big. But whatever those voters want, it would be a way to force it to be known by leadership. Known by them, and kind of have them on the spot to do it. Because if voters make clear what they want, and if leaders don’t do that, and don’t have much success in elections, then the “we told you, you ignored us, next election you’re gone” consequences, the sword-of-Damocles hanging over their heads, will result.
How could this happen or work?
First, and most importantly, the “Democratic voters only” part. Anyone who submits a vote (online of course) has to be verified as a registered Democratic voter before their vote is added to the total. There are ways to do that. Ways for the website to instantly verify you are who you say you are and that you are registered. The how is too many details to list here but it’s entirely practical and no more invasive than subscribing to a newsletter or buying a movie ticket. The Democratic party certainly could instantly verify who is registered, and that would be ideal, but unlikely. But there are other ways.
Validation would apply to people who were registered as Democrats in the last election. That’s to avoid a bunch of non-Democrats suddenly registering so that they could vote and skew the results. Perhaps it would include young adults who’ve just come of voting age since Nov 2024. But this “Democratic voters only” requirement is a key piece of making it different from just a “sign this petition” campaign, or from some meme-ish thing simply going viral. It makes it semi-official. It turns it into the one, valid, focused way to do this as opposed to scattered petitions.What are these “choices” exactly? Short statements or lists of a few points. Maybe “move to the middle” or “get radical about helping blue-collar” or “be big and loud and bold whatever the plan is” or “focus on the environment” or “run younger candidates” or one or a few of any such bullet points you can imagine.
Where do the statements come from? Some options here. Maybe start by inviting everyone who has substantial credentials for it, elected Democratic office holders, published policy wonks, think tanks. Doing that mostly to serve as a starting point, as food for thought. After that then open it to everyone.
Starting with statements from officials feels anti-grassroots but it’s just a starting point. What comes in from everyone else might completely overwhelm and push out the statements from officials.
When it is opened to everyone there has to be a way to keep it from being a flood. A flood of too many choices would make it impossible for people to find the ones that mean the most to them, or permit the best ones the chance to rise in votes. Maybe similar ones are summarized together. That would be less than ideal but a practical necessity. It would still reach the main goal of letting voters express clearly their top overall message to leadership.
That people can change their votes is also a key piece of making it semi-official, not just a petition. Just as in a primary, over the course of it those candidates most popular rise to the front, sometimes surprising or unlikely candidates, but the ones the voters want. Just so with this. As the results evolve over time the top few choices that the greatest number of voters want rise to the top.
Driving it forward. If this got any notice at all I suspect all kinds of action groups would push their Democratic members to submit votes: Young Democrats, Indivisible, environmental groups, unions, etc. It might be relatively easy to reach critical mass to where it takes off and drives itself forward of its own momentum.
Party leaders can already know what their voters want if they talk to them or even look at polls. What this adds is a way for us all to shout together as one, so there’s no avoiding it.
It’s an idea that needs some people who are good at organizing to get it going. Who’s up for that? Organize yourselves or contact me at my [email protected] and I would try to connect interested people. It doesn’t matter who drives it or how it happens. It just needs to happen.
OUR NONPROFIT NEWSROOM NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT. PLEASE CONSIDER A DONATION TODAY.
