Wasn't Peter a DFL endorsed elected official (county commissioner), seeking the same party endorsement against a non-endorsed rival? And hadn't this non-endorsed rival publicly stated that they would continue to run even if they lost this endorsement? From my viewpoint, it appears that RT was entering into this process at a distinct disadvantage. And was still able to pull-off a quasi-victory.
Maybe the appropriate response to the outcome of this process should be to see the positive aspects of the entire process? And maybe RT isn't so very far-off the mark when he stated that the issue needed to go to the "voters this fall", where he believes he has a decided advantage.
The only thing I ask is please do not forget the relative importance (to the election) of the process that occurred yesterday. The opportunity presented itself for those that do not wish RT to be elected as mayor for a 2nd term to deal a potentially fatal blow yesterday. It didn't happen. End of story.
It is now time for the candidates to get out and state their case with the voters that have in-fact always been the ones that decide who our next mayor will be.
dennis plante lind-bohanon
REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
