I always thought it better to elect a candidate because I thought they were the right person for the job, not because someone else thought they were right. I don't know what their motivations are, I don't know if they're trying to guard something, I don't know if endorsements were horse-traded or coerced, and recently I've discovered not all endorsements are true.
So what does it say about a candidate for whom seeking and publicizing endorsements is a cornerstone of their campaign? What does it say about a candidate when for a non-partisan position they keep parading their partisan colors?
I rarely think those candidates are trying to appeal to me, which is why I've not found them appealing. That is why I'm not big on endorsements.
What have I learned about political contributions?
The most important lesson came several weeks ago when I learned not to bother looking for local business' support. Many of my luncheon meetings reminded me a scene from a mobster movie.
Sammy Two-fingers reached across the table and pinched Tommy's cheek. Not letting go he pulled Tommy close to him so only he could hear.I would never have thought such a concern was justified until last Sunday when my opponent made much ado about nothing concerning our finance statement then accused a supporter of being a shill at a council meeting a few weeks back. The first shot, it turns out, was self-inflicted.
"Tommy, I like you. You're a good kid and you'll do great things for the city. But if Glitter wins and finds out we backed you.. well.. it's.. it's.. nothing personal. It's business."
Two-fingers let go of Tommy and smiled as they both sat back into the booth.
"So I can count on you for my re-election?"
Suddenly it made sense. It is business. It's the business of dirty politics. But that shouldn't be a local business Ferndale should endorse or encourage. Maybe that's the experience my opponent thinks I'm missing.
That's the kind of experience Ferndale can do without.