Mpls-Issues tip: PLEASE trim the previous message when responding. The redundant
characters make tough reading for Digest subscribers and needlessly lengthens download
times.
-----------
Why do we want people to honor endorsements?
Say two people from the DFL stand up and say they want to be considered for
an office. The party elects representatives (delegates) who agree to take
on the role of examining these two candidates against the values and policy
directions of the DFL. The DFL delegates screen both candidates and make a
determination on which one will do a better job of representing the
beliefs/values of the DFL. They then make an endorsement of the one
candidate who they believe will best represent the DFL values.
When the losing person decides to go against the DFL endorsement and still
claim to be part of the DFL, they are saying to the DFL delegates, "I know
better than all of you who can best represent the core beliefs of the DFL
people." They tell all the people who went through this examining process
that their judgment was wrong and that individual knows better than the
delegates who can best represent the delegates' interests. In my mind, it
is really disrespectful of the folks who did try to make a thoughtful
decision on who would best represent their beliefs. It seems odd to me that
in St. Paul, honoring an endorsement would be treated as a non-issue when it
is seems so core to what it means to be part of a party. It also seems odd
to me that people would have a problem with Stonewall DFL not wanting to
endorse someone who would not honor the judgment of the DFL membership.
Maybe someone can explain why disregarding a party endorsement is not a big
deal?
Carol Becker
Longfellow
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
