Endorsements of candidates don’t take place in vacuum
Many times voters in a particular political party are critical when party leaders issue candidate endorsements rather than allowing an open primary for public office. One such voter expressed his frustration of such an action in a letter to the editor in the Feb. 25 Buffalo News concerning the recent Democratic endorsement in the 27th Congressional district.
Several facts must be considered here. First, a primary costs a great deal of money, money that is needed for a general election, especially against a well-heeled opponent like Mr. Collins. Second, the Democrats who filed to run in this contest were interviewed by the various county committees and, more importantly, they participated in forums all over the district for several weeks where they answered questions from attendees and were able to discuss their platforms. In other words, the endorsers could observe them all “in action” so the final determination was not made in a vacuum. Third, primaries all too frequently result in a divided party electorate when it’s over.
While sometimes party leaders get their endorsement wrong, in this instance they endeavored to hone in on one candidate to save money for the general election (it’s regrettable money is important, but it is) and formulate a single candidate’s message.
I would suggest to those upset about this endorsement that they give the chosen Democratic candidate a chance, especially if he promises not to game the stock market or be a lapdog for the president!