On Monday, October 9th I attended the 9th Ward Candidate Forum which was held at the AIM Academy on 12th Avenue and 28th Street, hosted by the League of Women Voters (LWV).
After attending both a mayoral forum and City Council candidate forum organized by the LWV, I have decided that this group should stick to encouraging, educating and registering folks to vote. Their candidate forums inform the voting public about nothing at best, and, at worst, may mislead voters.
Let me explain. A few months ago, I attended a mayoral candidate forum. I really liked Jazz Hampton. However, I now look back at that event and realize that I was more swayed by his charisma, the fact that he is well-spoken, and he lives near me rather than knowledge about his agenda and what he would do in office. That was until I read The Minneapolis Times article “An Election Guide for the Perplexed” by Yiscah Bracha (October 4, 2025). One of the points she made was to observe who candidates are aligning with. When I read that Jazz Hampton is campaigning with the DSA crowd, and that Katie Cashman endorsed him, I had to admit that he isn’t the candidate for me. This was not evident at the LWV events, however.
Another take-away from that article was the strong possibility that the Hampton-Davis-Fatah coalition is really a rank choice strategy to elect Fateh for Mayor. That Davis and Hampton are not actually serious candidates, but just there to turn out votes that will transfer to help elect Fateh. This was not discussed at the LWV event either.
The LWV “get to know the candidate” forums expose very little about the candidates. For the candidate with no voting record, it’s hard to parse out the specific policies the candidate would work to pass because candidates can speak to an issue so vaguely that it sounds good. With an incumbent with a voting record, the LWV forums do not provide information on what exactly candidates have done while in office. I have a real problem with the vagueness coming out of the mouths of all politicians, and a candidate forum is a great way for candidates to practice this disingenuous skill. And the LWV doesn’t work to pin down candidates so voters can differentiate among them, letting them get away with vagueness.
Another problem with a LWV forum is that is that all questions have to be asked of both candidates. In an effort to be fair to candidates, these well-meaning ladies are unfair to voters. Council Member Chavez is an incumbent. He has a voting record. Dan Orban does not. A few days before the event, my neighbor and I wrote questions about Council Member Chavez’s votes that adversely affected the 9th Ward. But, because these questions could not also be asked of Orban, they couldn’t be asked at all. The only way the voting record of Chavez came up was when he, being the skillful politician he is, brought them up himself. Chavez said nothing about his votes against accepting the police union contract, against the implementation of the shot spotter, and his votes to cut the budget for police recruitment, for example. The LWV format meant the questions were never asked.
It is not fair to structure a candidate event where it is impossible to ask a specific question of the incumbent concerning the incumbent’s voting record. If the LWV wanted to make a fair forum, they would make it possible to ask a similar question of each candidate if the same question is impossible to be asked of both. For instance to the incumbent, “Why did you vote yes on this bill?” and to the others running against the incumbent, “How would you have voted on this bill?” That would provide much more information to voters and not skew the process for incumbents.
LWV candidate forums are not debates, where specific questions can be asked, followed by a one or two minute challenge to the answer given by the other candidates. But maybe this would be a better format. Make the candidates challenge each other and disclose their differences so voters can be truly informed.
Very little information can be gleaned from a candidate forum and many times, as in my experience at a mayoral forum, because of the vagueness of the questions and the vagueness of the answer a candidate can give, a voter can be swayed solely by the candidate’s likability instead of where s/he stands on an issue. As in both candidate forums I attended this year, I walked away no better informed than when I came in. I resolved not to attend any more candidate forums until the LWV makes real changes to how they are done. And to be honest, I’d prefer a debate.
I have to agree with Donna: these LWV events don’t provide much useful information to voters. Specifically, they don’t do anything to highlight the differences between candidates on issues. Mostly just nice generic talking from candidates, with no opportunity to follow-up to get actual answers.
Except for being able to see & talk with friends in the neighborhood, I would say attending these events was a waste of time.
Thank you, Donna, for this very useful analysis. It clarified for me some of the affiliations which I suspected. Now I feel much more comfortable in casting my votes in this election.