This is going to sound crazy and I can't imagine this senario ever happening but play along for a moment.
Suppose two candidates of the same party declare candidacy for the same office and a primary election is held. Further suppose that there is a clear winner in this primary. The winner obviously will represent the party in the general election. Please consider the following questions:
- Should the loser of the primary run for the office anyway?
- What would one call a person who ignored the will of the people and ran as an independent?
- Should the loser in the primary, if he runs as an independent, expect to be trusted by anyone in his former party?
- Should the loser in the primary, if he runs as an independent , expect to have the plum committee appointments if he wins in the general election.
- Should the loser of the primary have the support of the party members in the general election?
- If members of the party support the loser of the primary in the general election, are they the ones who are hurting the party?
- Had the loser won the primary, would all the losers supporters expect to have the support of the entire party in the general election?
- If the loser of the primary had no intention of abiding with the will of the primary voters, why did he bother with the primary election anyway?
- If the loser of the primary runs as an independent in the general election, is this evidence of the party being in shambles or the ego of one person getting in the way?
- If the loser of the primary runs for the general election is he telling everyone to stick it?
I really don't think there is any doubt about how a Republican would answer the above questions. I thought I knew how Democrats would too. Sadly, I now truly wonder. I suppose time will tell.
Although I supported Lamont in yesterday's CT primary, I did not wish that Senator Leiberman would be banished from the Democratic Party. After listening to his Declaration of Independence last night, I have changed my mind.