The endorsements games

[question everything]

We watched with awe how with a magic wand he ended the political careers of loyal, reliable Republicans. We have read here descriptions about voters who were not even sure why they were voting the way they did, except that the emperor said so.

And.... I could not help comparing this to our own endorsements game.

Four years ago there were six candidates for Hennepin county sheriff and about four, I think, for the county attorney.

The strib, that used to endorse candidates did so. Endorsed two alternatives for each office, not the ones the party endorsed.

The local neighborhood paper had a series of questions submitted to all the candidates and I remember taking my time to read all. Also watched part of a debate.

The final winners? Why, the ones endorsed by the party.

I admit, I felt foolish. Why bother studying the candidates if it was obvious that many voters just followed the party endorsements.

The primaries used to take place in September and when they were moved to August many - the strib - objected. Many are on vacation, they said, out of town, enjoying the summer who really would not care about voting. So they do not. Just follow the endorsements.

I may be exaggerating. In our first years in Minnesota we were not aware of the existence of primaries. Why, because candidates who vowed to "abide by the party" dropped out. The primaries were really just rubber stamps for the endorsed candidates. Only after I registered to be a delegate to the county convention that I was getting phone calls and flyers about candidates.

I was glad that Dayton first, and then Walz and perhaps others chose to stay in the race and.. won.

Oh well..

[iemanja]

1. What's your solution?

To cancel the caucuses? The ending of your own post demonstrates to be false your claim that voters just follow the DFL endorsement. Moreover, the only reason Craig isn’t seeking the endorsement is because she can’t win it. I’m sorry you have issues with the state Democratic Party. There are others options.

[question everything]

2. I would like to remove the "abiding by the endorsement" promise by the candidates.

Sure, to welcome it, to be grateful but not to be bound by it.

Caucuses are fine to debate and vote on topics that define the party. And replacing them with primaries to select candidates has been important.

I was at a mini convention to select a candidate for an office which became vacant. The candidates sat at the dais ready to answer questions and first one, you’ve guessed it: will you abide by the endorsement”. Of course they all said yes and after it the ones not endorsed dropped out.

Candidates should appeal to all their future constituents, not just to the activists.

Yes, I realize that funds are important but if you have it, go beyond the endorsement.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

3. I can't tell what you're objecting to -- the fact that there's an endorsement process, or the fact that sometimes

candidates don't abide by it, or the fact that candidates are asked about it?

[question everything]

4. Not an objection but an observation, really, thinking out loudly.

The “objection” is to voters who just vote as they are told instead of thinking. I have seen it in Minnesota, we all have seen it in Texas and, no doubt, all over the country.

But, yes, I wish that candidates who believe that they have important message carry it directly to the voters not just activists.

Sorry about meandering..