The first Congressional District needs to reconsider inappropriate action.
It is one thing to privately support candidates they like. It is fully yet another to officially endorse a candidate while the party itself is still determining the outcome.
An official endorsement implies many things, among which is the suggestion that anyone else who wishes to participate within the process is really no longer welcome. That the efforts made to support a party committee will be diverted to represent interests that the contributor does not want.
Is the 1st CD cte trying to lessen overall involvement by those who might disagree with pet choices in a primary?
When a general election arrives it is all hands on deck as implied with membership of the party. However, in a primary or pre-convention contest, the suggestion that all members have coalesced to agree that a single candidate is preferable over another is ludicrous and irresponsible.
I am a member of the 1st congressional district, and as a Republican delegate I was never consulted, nor asked for an opinion on the letter you see to the right. Are we to conclude that duly elected delegates are to be ignored by the 1st congressional district executive board in the acts of favoritism?
There was no vote that we were allowed to participate in on this, and unilateral decision making is apparently the new rule. While I had no horse in this contest, it is troubling that those who do would pretend to know my favor.
The first congressional district should rescind its endorsement until after the convention has selected its candidate.