So last week I asked what the criteria should be for the nominating committee for statewide candidates; I got an earful of interesting comments. Most seemed to agree that candidates need to meet the bare minimum requirements, and let the delegates decide.
But several commenters opined that only those agreeing to abide by the endorsement should be allowed to speak at the state convention. The idea is not without merit or precedence; my own BPOU of Steele County restricted speaking access at our convention to candidates who agreed to abide. The reason for the rule was mainly to cut down on the long list of speakers, but nonetheless it passed unanimously. And Mark Dayton famously skipped the DFL convention in 2010 because he was the lone candidate to refuse to abide by the endorsement-he mingled on the floor but did not address the convention.
So should the MNGOP state convention allow only candidates agreeing to abide by the endorsement to address the delegates?
Clarification; this is a hypothetical question, and I'm not proposing this for this year's convention. The rules committee, not nominations, has the responsibility of setting the rules of the convention.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Yes, we're a "big tent". But this is for ENDORSEMENT. In 2010, we were forced into listening to the likes of Harold Shudlick and "Earth Protector" Leslie Davis. Utter wastes of time.
When are we going to put teeth into the endorsement process? Or, would you rather hear from Dayton and Franken at OUR convention? If you draw a line in between, its simply a point on a map.
If you can't honor the delegates, the delegates should not honor YOU with their time. Its as simple as that.
Sorry, but we all fret endlessly that "the establishment" is "picking our candidates." Yet somehow we think that 2000 self-chosen Republican delegates can decide who the other 2 million Republicans in the State can or will vote for? I hate to break it to you folks, but at that point you ARE the "establishment" and you should not be keeping ANY reasonable candidate from competing for September primary and November general votes. Endorse who you want, and please consider electability, and all that other absolutely essential stuff as well as good speech-making, but don't just close good candidates out. What happens to essential party unity when you do that? SOMEBODY is backing them; don't they deserve a chance to hear their preferred choice speak?
Post a Comment