As the 2nd District (OH) Turns: Those Worthless Outsider Endorsements of Bob McEwen

BizzyBlog ^ | June 2, 2005 | BizzyBlog

[bizzyblog]

Previously, I have criticized Paul Weyrich's endorsement of Bob McEwen here in detail and here for his (Weyrich's) inconsistency on term limits.

There is a larger topic here, and that is the propriety of such endorsements in a race of this nature. There is a place for outsider endorsements in politics, but this race isn't it, and I'll explain why.

Outsider endorsements can pass the smell test in two situations:

• The first is if there are only a few candidates involved, and there is a clear philosophical divide between those few candidates. The outsider can claim that they know the person they are endorsing and that the endorsee's positions on the issues are, in his/her opinion, more correct than that of the other candidates. A credible endorsement by an outsider who knows only one candidate cannot be made if there is a very large field, or if the few candidates' political positions are very similar.
• Alternatively, the endorser could personally know all of the few candidates running and make their endorsement based on a combination of that knowledge and issue positions (though the next dinner party with those not endorsed would probably be a little chilly).

The outsider endorsements in this race can't even pass the stench test, let alone either of the above smell tests.

Let's take it on faith (pun intended) that the out-of-towners listed here (James Dobson, Jack Kemp, Paul Weyrich, Ed Meese, Tony Perkins, and Don Wildmon) all know Bob McEwen very well, think very highly of him, and believe he would make a good, perhaps even great, congressman.

That's not enough. To conscientiously endorse McEwen in a given race, they have to satisfy themselves that he will be a better congressman than any of the other available alternatives. And they can't.

[bizzyblog]

The outsiders, by pretending to know things they can't possibly know, are corrupting the political process with their endorsements.

[zbigreddogz]

CORRUPTING THE POLITICAL PROCESS?!?!?!!?!

THROUGH SPEAKING THEIR MIND?!?!?! BY ENGAGING IN FREE POLITICAL SPEECH!?!?!?!

I've heard some dumb things on FR before, but this is without a doubt the dumbest.

I don't give a rats ass who you support in the race, this is just mindbogglingly stupid.

[bizzyblog]

Sorry, if the endorser can't possibly know what they are talking about, their "free speech" is irresponsible. As I said in the full post, these people can't possibly know the opponents, who on paper appear to have very similar positions. So how can they endorse him, other than to say "I like the guy"? BFD. But their endorsements go well beyond that, and are IRRESPONSIBLE.

Endorsements from outsiders in this situation corrupt the process because it stops some voters who might actually look into the candidates' records, dispositions, etc. from doing so, and the endorsers know it. It's very effective, but it's also a corrupting intrusion that is way out of line.

I'm not trying to prevent these people from speaking, I just expect them (especially these people of supposedly stellar character) to act responsibly. And they aren't, for reasons clearly documented.

So, no, I'm not backing off one inch. And if you read the whole post, you'll at least understand my reasoning, even if you don't agree with it.