One of the most incorrect notions you can run across in the two-party system is the errant belief that one party is consistently united while the other is an impossible assemblage of warring factions. It's not uncommon to hear a loyalist from either party claim, "we just seem to eat our own while the [insert party of discussion here] stay unified against us." Whenever a Republican or Democrat says this they're usually wrong, because both parties have at it internally, sometimes harshly so, and at times in the silliest ways.

Here's one example. In this post I noted I've endorsed a Democrat, DJ Wilson, running for the Edmonds City Council, and wrote a letter to the editor accordingly. This caused some upset with a selective number of Republicans. High dudgeon might be more accurate.

As is too often the case with a selected number of activists on both sides of the aisle, they got angry first and sought out the facts later...if ever at all. Since none of those so aggrieved has had the gumption to pose such issues to me directly, let's cover them briefly:

DJ Wilson is running for a non-partisan post. He is running against another Democrat; there is no Republican, or any other candidate at all, in the race. DJ is the better of the two candidates in my view. When it comes to local, civic issues where partisanship rarely if ever plays a role, I've found him to be a reasonable voice with a serious commitment to effective public service. Why wouldn't I endorse him in that scenario?

Lest the reader think this phenomena is solely a hallmark of Republican politics, I can also report DJ Wilson, and Aaron Reardon for that matter, were flayed by certain folks within the Democratic party for having the gall to endorse me for the non-partisan position of Charter Review Commissioner in 2005. It got so far as "fighting words" being leveled in one instance. The Democratic grassroots would otherwise declare them "DINO's," but obviously the equivalent to the boorish RINO label doesn't stick very well in this state.

Let me just say this sort of behavior is terribly uncomplimentary of both parties. In non-partisan races there should be a reasonable assumption that good faith endorsements can and will be made to support the best candidate, period. Party can be a very instructive tool for filtering candidates, but party uber alles is moronic, particularly in non-partisan races. See, for example, how Republicans routinely vote for candidates like Brian Sonntag and Mike Murphy because they're clearly the most competent person on the ballot.

Interestingly, the same people that are so quick to take umbrage about such endorsements are usually the Republicans who don't understand why their preferred candidates can't win suburban legislative seats anymore, or the Democrats who stood befuddled when George W. Bush beat John Kerry. I wouldn't say there's a direct correlation, but it's more than just a coincidence.

****

Footnote: let me also answer a couple questions also posed by the intemperate activists angered by my endorsement. No, I'm not interested in running for another public office now (nor do I anticipate doing so for quite a long time...if ever). Also, no, I don't live in Edmonds and thus couldn't have run for the position in question. I can answer more at ericearling at gmail dot com if those curious have the decency to inquire directly.