Talk:2020 Green Party presidential primaries/Archive 1

Archive 1

Question: Declared candidates and notoriety

Hello. I am very definitely a declared Green Party candidate for President, and have been in the past. Obviously I won't add myself. But I am interested in learning the criteria for inclusion. Do the same rules of notoriety apply? Thank you -- Alan Augustson, https://run-alan.run 73.26.137.239 (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

When will the various states be holding their primaries? Which will be holding them on a different date from the other parties?

When will the various states be holding their primaries? Which states will be holding them on a different date from the other parties? I am particularly interested in learning when the NY primaries will be. 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:34F7:A533:931E:2006 (talk) 14:00, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent highly suspicious deletions

The recent purge of Green Party candidates was performed from anonymous accounts with no other contributions. This suggests that the accounts were created for no purpose other than these deletions. That's not upholding Wikipedia standards; that's an attempt to silence those candidates. Probably a Green Party insider with connections to the presumptive nominee. CyndiMcIncheese (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you can delete me now. :P

Candidate here. On 10 June 2019 I announced the end of my Presidential campaign and my formal endorsement of Dario Hunter for the 2020 Green Party Nomination for President. On 11 June 2019 I filed my campaign's Termination Report with the FEC. AlanAugustson (talk) 23:07, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

References

Why is Jesse Ventura still listed when the references are more than 6 months old?

Why is Jesse Ventura still listed when the references are more than 6 months old? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:65CA:5F74:8706:8212 (talk) 20:33, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, he is past the expiration date. Unless some more recent sources can be found verifying that he has expressed interest in running, he should be removed from that section at least. Not sure whether to remove him altogether, or put him in a different category ("previously expressed interest"?). --A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 20:29, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I just deleted Jesse Ventura after Randomdude0000 confirmed that he was past the expiration date. Since he was the only person in the category of expressing interest, I deleted it all. I then received a message that I had done something wrong, was suspected of VANDALISM, and the edit had been reverted. HUH? The link to vandalism said that any change that is meant to improve an article is by definition not vandalism. How is keeping the article up to date vandalism? Jesse Ventura should be in that category. That category has NO ONE in it, thus is superfluous. What did I do wrong? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:F123:349D:A915:3C0B (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Typo edit: Jesse Ventura should NOT be in that category. 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:F123:349D:A915:3C0B (talk) 02:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I see that someone else has re-done what I did, and it was let stand. So why me? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:346C:B900:C9D2:286C (talk) 01:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I see what you mean [1]. I suspect it's because you're an IP editor. I've pinged the user at your talk page.David O. Johnson (talk) 02:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

When, specifically, are the dates of the Green Party primaries?

When, specifically, are the dates of the Green Party primaries? SOME are being held on the same date as the Democratic and Republican primaries for that state—WHICH states? When are the others being held? When are the New York State primaries? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:3C73:BEED:31EC:156F (talk) 03:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Finding out the dates of the primaries will require quite a bit of research as most state green parties dont have ballot lines for their primaries, they often hold private events in place of a statewide primary. Although some states such as MA and CA do in fact have statewide open primaries. Either way, someone would have to contact each of the 50+ state green parties and caucuses to find out the specific dates of their primaries. At least, thats what happened in 2016. Jp16103 22:05, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Electoral vote

"In 2016, LaDuke became the first Native American woman and Green Party candidate to receive an Electoral College vote for vice president." This is a very misleading statement, as LaDuke was not the Green Party nominee for vice president in 2016. Does the party really deserve credit for one faithless elector voting for one of their former nominees? Jah77 (talk) 13:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Minnesota Caucus/Straw Poll

In order to prevent constant reverting, I wanted to reopen a discussion about the MN straw poll that Dario Hunter won, and whether or not this should be included as a victory for Hunter. This article is about the process to elect delegates to represent a candidate for the Green Party's nominee for President, which is why state primaries, caucuses, and conventions are included in the totals of this article.

In February 2020, the Minnesota Green Party held a non-binding caucus/strawpoll to gauge support for a candidate among the state Party. No delegates were awarded, and vote totals were not released in the poll. Delegates for this state will be awarded at the State Convention in June 2020.

Once the delegates are awarded, the article should be updated to show the winner. Until then, the article should show the MN results are pending, this is not a slight to Hunter in any way, but it would be dishonest to declare him the winner before the state has completed its primary process. Jp16103 13:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The above comments don’t reflect reliable sourcing - specifically the statement from the MN Greens themselves who declared Hunter the winner in this article, entitled “Dario Hunter Wins Green Party of Minnesota Presidential Caucus”: https://www.mngreens.org/dario_hunter_wins_green_party_of_minnesota_presidential_caucus Note also that according to the MN Greens, the official name of that contest is the Green Party of Minnesota Presidential Caucus. Delegates may be selected later, but that would be true of a number of races in this primary. MN has been noted as a win for Hunter on this page for sometime, with explanations and sources provided by multiple editors. It seems that mostly the same editors keep removing and reverting in regards to this issue and changing the name of the caucus to alternatives to its official name that serve to diminish it. The same editors are also responsible for edits that are of benefit to the Hawkins campaign. One editor in particular is already past three reverts. It’s simple: Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your perspectives. If MN Greens - the responsible party for the election - say Hunter won the Minnesota CAUCUS and a reliable source has been provided, then that should be the end of the matter. 107.77.230.177 (talk) 18:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

My previous comments are directly from the national Green Party which overseas the national candidate selection process, which makes it a very reliable source. The fact that this caucus/straw poll was non-binding, and the final results of Minnesota's delegate process are not complete is why it would be premature to declare Dario Hunter as the winner of the state until delegates are awarded. Minnesota is following the same process that happened in 2016, once delegates are awarded, the winner of the state should be declared.

Pinging other editors: @Devonian Wombat and Wekahash: Jp16103 18:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The Green Party is decentralized. The states decide their election process. And - once again - MN Greens have declared Hunter the winner. When you say it’s premature to declare him the winner, you are replacing your personal perspective for that of the Minn. Green Party which has declared him the winner (as per the source provided). What part of the MN Greens declaration “Dario Hunter Wins Green Party of Minnesota Presidential Caucus” is difficult to understand? Feel free to cast shade on that on your own personal page, but Wiki is not your personal page. 107.77.230.177 (talk) 19:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know why you are making this personal, I have nothing against Hunter and don't have a dog in this race. As I said previously in the edit summaries, this article is about the process to elect delegates to represent a candidate for the Green Party's nominee for President at the Green convention. The same article you cite says that the vote was non-binding and was a means to gauge preference among the state party, and that delegates will be elected in June. On Tuesday February 25, the Green Party of Minnesota held its 2020 Presidential Caucus Straw Poll, which was the first Green Party Presidential caucus in the country in this election cycle. Yes, Hunter won the caucus/straw poll vote, the results table shows this. However, the state has not awarded delegates to any candidate, therefore, the state has not completed its process to elect delegates to represent a candidate for the Green Party's nominee for President of the United States at the 2020 Green National Convention. To "win a state" is to win the majority of its delegates, this is how every primary article on Wikipedia works. It may be necessary to include two maps, one for popular vote wins, and one for delegate wins. As a side note, once the MN state convention happens and the binding vote totals are released, those votes will be featured in the article as well as we have done with other states.

I have a solution that I think will be acceptable to everyone, a second map based on popular vote totals. The same type of map can be seen on the Democratic Primary pages. Jp16103 20:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC

The current map is actually the one based on popular vote totals, but yes, I support this compromise of having two maps, as doing that also means we can showcase Hunter and Hawkins as tied in the Wisconsin, Ohio and Massachusetts delegate races. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Once again, you are creating rationalizations for what you want to do, not reflecting sources which is what Wiki expects you to do. Why are you so set on removing this? Despite MN’s clear statement that it’s a win for Hunter? Suspect. 107.77.227.79 (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I will work on creating the two maps. For the ties, both candidate colors should be in the state (see Dem primary as an example) if someone is skilled with SVG to help start this project, please feel free to do so. As a reminder, no inkscape. @Devonian Wombat: thanks for your input. Jp16103 00:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Should votes be included in the 'Candidates' box?

At the moment, 9 out of the 18 states don't have fully announced results. There are sources for the delegates, but not for the corresponding votes. As a result there are absurd vote/delegate ratios for candidates since a majority of the reported votes are from one singular state, California. This poorly sourced, inaccurate stat is then put on the 2020 United States presidential election page. Should we remove the vote section from the 'Candidates' box until more states have declared votes? The numbers would still be available at the 'Results' section, just with the context that most states haven't reported. Catiline52 (talk) 04:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a fair suggestion, considering how many state conventions don't release vote totals for their primaries. If there was a larger consensus around this issue, I would not be opposed to removing the vote totals from the candidates box, but maybe a better option would be adding an endnote after Votes explaining that most states don't release their vote totals, this probably should be done in the infobox too. Jp16103 13:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

??????????????

When will and how it be decided who will be the 2020 Green Party nominee for president?

Or, has it already been decided (and, if so, how)?

This article is completely unclear on this matter, which is why I came to this article and why most people would come to it.

Absolutely ridiculous article which gives little useful information. ---Dagme (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Only 350 delegates

Apparently the "382 delegates" is the max eligible number of delegates, but many states did not register, resulting in the total only being 350 delegates. I'll update the page with the new info. Catiline52 (talk) 09:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing this, I will update the table for the remaining states. Jp16103 13:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC)