On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, phaedrus wrote: > If a candidate is the best candidate from both a Green perspective and a > DFL perspective, why should they not seek endorsement by both? Why is > that any different than seeking endorsement any other two groups? > > I could imagine a candidate who would be supported by local Green, DFL, > and GOP voters. Why should they not get all three endorsements?
I cannot imagine the DFL endorsing a Green under any circumstances. I believe they have a rule prohibiting it. The GOP might give Greens quiet support vs the DFL. I know of no case where they have publicly endorsed a Green. I don't know if they have a rule against it. Hard to imagine the DFL endorsing GOP, or GOP DFL; probably prohibited by their rules. Greens are highly unlikely to endorse any GOP, as too far from GP values. So ALL we are really left with is an appeal for Greens to endorse DFL. For the GP not to run, but stand aside for the DFL. Or endorse a ho-hum DFLer due to fear (encouraged by the DFL candidate) of the Western-civilization-ending GOP candidate. Fear. Nothing positive. No olive branches extended by the DFL to the GP. Now we're down to what the DFL has been beating the GP over the head and shoulders with for several years. "Spoiler" taking "our" votes. Etc Etc. We've heard it all before ad nauseum (no overstatement!) The GP is not going to stand down. It is going to run more and more local races, where it has won before and can and will win again. If the DFL wants to make life better for themselves, they'll pass IRV (Instant Runoff Voting) because most Greens will in fact vote for the DFL as # 2 choice. Let's get on with IRV! --David Shove Roseville _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
