Skip to main content

Sour Grapes



I do not know if this has always been the case, but I am seeing a trend in candidates who, if not receiving a particular endorsement, turn around and kick the endorsing organization. It’s not a good look. If they were so awful, why were you seeking their endorsement in the first place?

It’s also not a very good long-term strategy. First of all, in insulting the organization, you are pretty much insulting the members of the organization, who are probably the voters you are trying to reach. Secondly, what if you ever decided to run again? Do you really want to burn those bridges now?

I agree that some local endorsements by groups have just been weird this time around. (I’m not even going to touch individual endorsements.) But is it better to say, “I am disappointed not to to receive the ABCDQ endorsement,”or to say, “They’re all jerks and that’s why they didn’t endorse me”? This seems to me to be a relatively simple choice.

Now, by all means, if you can prove bias or malfeasance in the endorsement process, you might want to comment. Did the evaluators ask how many bags of Skittles you can provide for their organization each year?  Did they ask questions that would be illegal in a job interview? Or, if in a group endorsement meeting, were some candidates permitted to bus in voters from out of district? This would be worth addressing.

I’m not aware of any of the above actually happening, by the way. Merely offering them as examples.

If an organization makes poor endorsement choices, it will eventually reflect on them. If a candidate  goes out of their way to lash out after losing out on endorsements, it will reflect on the candidate.

As the fellow on the radio says, “Just a thought. Not a sermon.”


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Teacher Gifts

Today is the last day of school before the Winter Break. It’s a good time to remember the far-reaching nature of our public school system. You may not have children. You may have sent your children to independent schools. It matters not. You will be impacted one way or another. Yesterday I read a long thread on Facebook about several waves of illness in the schools right now. There’s influenza A and norovirus, I believe. And of course there’s COVID. Apparently in some individual schools the rate of illness is high enough for school admin to notify parents.  When I was little the acceptable holiday gift for a teacher was one of those lovely floral handkerchief squares. (I don’t know what it was for male teachers. They were rare in my elementary years.) These days the range of teacher gifts is wider and I have fond memories of Target gift cards which I have written about before. I think it’s safe to say that giving one’s teacher Influenza, norovirus, or COVID is not the ideal holiday...
1 comment
Read more

They Can Wait

This is not a typical Saturday post. That’s because, in my community, it’s not a typical Saturday.  Oakland Mills High School, after years of deferred repair, needs massive renovation. It’s pretty simple: when you don’t fix a problem it gets bigger. The school system itself said the the OMHS school building was  "no longer conducive to learning" back in 2018.  2018 .  But Thursday the Boad of Education voted to push it out of the lineup of important projects which will be given the go-ahead to proceed soonest.  In my opinion it’s a terrible decision and sets a dangerous precedent. To explain, here’s the advocacy letter I sent in support of Oakland Mills High School. I was rather proud of it. I am writing to ask you to proceed with needed renovation at Oakland Mills High School in the most timely and comprehensive manner humanly possible. I have read the letter sent to you by the Oakland Mills Community Association and I am in complete agreement. You are extremel...
1 comment
Read more

Separate and Unequal

  Remember “Separate but equal”? Remember how that really meant that Black schools languished in  broken-down buildings without adequate heat or toilet facilities, with cast-off, ragged learning materials, underfunded and largely ignored? The Supreme Court struck that down in 1954. The evidence was clear that separate was not equal. Plessy v Ferguson had led to - - no, endorsed - - deeply unequal schooling and opportunities. We tend to think of Brown v Board as being purely about racial integration. It was not.  It was about the logical consequences of segregation. And they were not, not, not equal. The ruling in 1954 didn’t transform public education for non-whites into a land of milk and honey by any means. But it articulated some essential truths in a way that made including everyone a legal precedent which could be relied upon and built upon. It was better than what came before it but it rested upon unsteady ground. It did not necessarily change the hearts or minds ...
1 comment
Read more