Monday, October 20, 2008

It's a little hard to understand 

A local party organization endorses a candidate. �That candidate has some ethical baggage on him, enough that others suggest they'd rather have someone else be the party's nominee. �That person respects the endorsement and does not run for the office, but the efforts of others put her ahead of the ethically-burdened endorsee in the primary. �

Now, in most cases that would be it, wouldn't it? �You would think the party leaders who endorsed the loser would be rather chagrined that their choice lost to someone�who didn't run a campaign. �And you would think they'd tell the loser it's the people's will, and thanks for the memories. �When said loser decides he wants to run a write-in campaign, you would think they'd whisper to him this was a bad idea, wouldn't you? �

Not if you're the SD 16 Republican BPOU. �If you're them, you endorse the loser. �As a write-in. �Against the Republican.

Can someone from the MNGOP explain to me how a BPOU can even hold an endorsement convention�after�a primary has already taken place? �I would like to know if this has ever happened before. �(Brodkorb, I'm looking at you. �You always know this trivia.)

Labels: ,