At 02:11 PM 2/22/01 -0600, Annie Young wrote:
>Is there any truth to the fact that the GLBT rating is impacted by the
>candidate's answer to the age old litmus test - will you run against the
>DFL endorsed candidate in the primary? The fact that so many candidates
>are saying yes, they will run in the primary, should give pause to the
>folks who hold this litmus test as the almighty decision on whether a
>person is qualified and competent to do the job and therefore should be
>entitled to run.
When I was active with Stonewall DFL predicessor, 10 years or more ago, I
always opposed having such a question in our screening procedures. This
question says nothing about whether a candidate is qualified to do the
job--and has nothing to say about whether a candidate knows anything about
GLBT issues or is supportive of the community. I was kicked out of the DFL
when I supported Arne Carlson for Governor--and did so publically. I'd
like to thank David Brauer for the Mpls issues toolkit. That will be very
valuable for people making their decisions for office.
>As I have stated before it really bothers me that the filing is in July and
>Joe, Susan and Oprah who didn't know the entire process of endorsements
>tries to run for office against all the know-it-all's who have been playing
>the game since over a year ago. Again, I propose no political season and
>endorsements should really begin until after the filing dates when we know
>who the entire cast of characters will be. I always worry that we may miss
>the best just because they waited until last by plunking down their $20 and
>saying they would like to be considered for an elected office. It also may
>contribute to campaign finance reform - if the pre-election cycle was
>shortened to be from mid-July to Sept or Nov. it sure would mean that some
>candidate's could get their gardens planted instead of being at 25 meetings
>during the spring which means less mailings and literature to be printed (a
>large part of the expense of running).
>Food for thought,
It seems to me the problem is that there is no opportunity for more
recently interested people to get involved in the DFL endorsement process
for mayor and city council. However, I think that this whole endorsement
process--with the insiders vs those trying to figure it all out will
backfire on the DFL--and on Stonewall DFL and other DFL affiliates. There
is no point for a candidate to spend time, money and resources in order to
get Stonewall DFL endorsement, when Stonewall uses question number 2: will
you abide by DFL endorsement as the number one criteria of whether a
candidate will get Stonewall DFL endorsement. A friend of mine mentioned
that Stonewall feels they have to do this, because they could otherwise get
de-chartered from the DFL. Come on. Could you imagine the publicity if
the DFL tried to de-charter the Stonewall DFL? Give me a break.
Eva
Eva Young
Central
speaking for myself, not for anyone else
and so-called, self-appointed Gay "leaders" often don't speak for me
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
