Let me explain, using the current race for the Chair of the Harris County Republican Party as an example. When I say “groups of endorsements”, I’m not talking about Republican Women’s Clubs, booster groups or PAC’s. I’m talking about looking at a candidate’s list of endorsements and determining if there is a pattern amongst those listed which could be helpful in getting past the candidate’s rhetoric.
Let’s take a look at incumbent Chair Jared Woodfill’s endorsements, listed as Underwriters and Host Supporters of his December fundraiser. Glancing at the list, it is easy to see that the biggest group supporting Mr. Woodfill are party insiders and social conservatives, for the most part out of touch with the grassroots efforts over the last year in support of rational, three pronged conservatism.
Next, hop over to candidate Paul Simpson’s endorsement list. You find a coalition of precinct chairs, Republican club officers and yes, Tea Party representatives, the most prominent of which is Ms. Catherine Engelbrecht, who founded the Houston Tea Party Patriots after some disagreements with the Houston Tea Party Society regarding vision and support of candidates. I would group this list as being, for the most part, from the fiscal and national security prongs, and very in touch with the grassroots.
And lastly, let’s move over to candidate Ed Hubbard’s list. It is similar to Mr. Simpson’s, listing a lot of precinct chairs, club officers and grassroots workers. As well, Betsy Lake, who, as a former chair of the party built the coalition that Mr. Woodfill has split with his brand social conservatism, which focuses more on a particular type of religious view. Mr. Hubbard, however, has been able to attract many social conservatives, such as Artemio Muniz and Claver Kamau-Imani, both of whom are spreading social conservatism in the minority communities. So my grouping here would include all three prongs, slightly broader than Mr. Simpson’s group.
Note: prior to writing this, I inquired of all four candidates in the race about their lists and if they were current. Don Large has decided not to issue an endorsement list. Both Mr. Simpson and Mr. Hubbard will have updated, longer lists tomorrow. I did not receive a response from Mr. Woodfill.
I also use endorsements as a negative. For instance, I’m sure that the wretched stench of Terry Lowry’s Link Letter will be filling mailboxes in the next week or two. If there is a viable alternative to anyone he endorses, I’ll definitely vote against his candidate, knowing that anyone that paid for his services doesn’t care at all about the image of the Republican Party or the negative perception he heaps upon the Church.
Almost in the same category would be an endorsement by Steven Hotze, who issued his list this past Friday. He states that the goal is “to present voters a listing of the best qualified, most conservative candidates.” Looking over that list, I’m hard pressed to see how exactly he met that goal.
And last, but by no means least, if you think that you are important enough to send out an email endorsing a candidate, make certain that you get your facts straight. Gone are the days when you can, either intentionally or unintentionally, put forth something as factual if it is not. And campaign workers, such as Mr. Woodfill’s Fric and Frac, should check the facts before spreading false information, as they found out on Facebook. Thank you Al Gore for inventing the internet.
All that being said, I am aware of one forthcoming endorsement that will, if it does nothing else, shine the light on the absolute necessity of a change in leadership at the HCRP if the party intends to remain relevant in Harris County elections. I’m sure that you will know which one I’m talking about when you see it in your inbox.
So that is my take on endorsements, which I think is applicable to any race, not just the HCRP chair race. Your mileage my vary.