Postmortem on the Maine Convention

Misbegotten fear and conflict avoidance are driving American politics

Jul 29, 2026

As the Maine convention and the Democratic National Convention of 2024 both vividly display, our politics is driven by fear, not intelligent democratic process

This is a short essay to close the loop on the recent Maine convention that crowned Troy Jackson as the Democratic Party’s nominee for the U.S. Senate in the November midterm election.

My hopes were terribly misplaced.

I envisioned four or five of Maine’s most competitive Democratic candidates making their cases before the convention. After thoughtful deliberation—and, if necessary, multiple rounds of voting—I expected the 571 delegates to select the candidate they believed, first and foremost, was best qualified to defend the Constitution, uphold the rule of law, and faithfully honor the oath of office. As a second vital criterion, they would choose the candidate who stood the best chance of defeating Susan Collins in November.

Alas, what we got instead was a vapid “show convention.” It reminded me of the closed-door crowning of Kamala Harris, followed by the dog-and-pony convention I myself attended in Chicago in the summer of 2024.

In both cases, the party apparatus prioritized speed and the appearance of unity over a genuinely competitive selection process. Fear of internal division seemed to outweigh the benefits of open deliberation, multiple candidates, meaningful debate, and excellence in democratic selection.

The message of both conventions was clear, simple, and fear-based: rally quickly behind a single standard-bearer.

Our politics is driven by fear, not intelligent democratic process.

Proof of the Absurdity of the Convention

So flawed was the Maine selection process that excellent contenders for the Democratic Party’s nomination, like Shenna Bellows, Nirav Shah, Dan Kleban, and Jordan Wood, dropped out before the convention even started.

Proof of the absurdity of the convention in Maine, which took place on July 25, is revealed by the final vote count: 566 for Troy Jackson and 5 for Saundra Pelletier.

Pelletier refused to drop out because she wanted to prevent a political “coronation” and ensure delegates had a democratic choice rather than settling for an establishment “king.”

“We don’t want kings in this country,” Pelletier said. “Why would we anoint a king in the state of Maine? What message does that send to the country about the decisions that Mainers make and the Democratic Party makes?”

Why did the other far more viable candidates withdraw?

Because they faced overwhelming pressure to unite behind the anointed frontrunner by party operators trained in dependent vs. independent decision-making by the past fifty years of primary-driven nomination politics.

Proof of the absurdity of the convention in Maine is revealed by the final vote count: 566 for Troy Jackson and 5 for Saundra Pelletier

Fear and Conflict Avoidance

Here’s the key thing. My own beloved Democrats are sheepish. They are conflict-avoidant because the institutional structures necessary for genuine democratic decision-making are gone. They disappeared in the 1970s and 1980s.

The result is that most Democrats—and Republicans—have forgotten how to vet candidates, disagree vigorously, and compromise after robust debate.

Nobody actually seems to comprehend what a true deliberative convention is anymore. Deference to our dysfunctional primary system has erased institutional memory and the wisdom of the ages.

Laissez-Faire vs. Checks-and-Balances Democracy

Seemingly, we’ll have to relearn the lost art of democratic deliberation—to weed out dangerous candidates—after repeated, painful political failures and unknown future crises.

Two terms of an authoritarian demagogue in the White House—one swept into office, don’t forget, by two dog-and-pony show conventions—have not been enough to humble us.