In what to many would be “breaking news,” a post in Virginia Virtucon insinuated that Mike Farris endorsed Pete Snyder for Lieutenant Governor in an effort by Farris shore up support for a 2014 US Senate bid.
Willie Deutsch lays out exactly why Mike Farris endorsed Pete Snyder – it’s because Snyder built a relationship with Farris, worked hard on the issues that matter, and showed that he was willing to fight for social issues even if the powers that be tried to rein him in:
If you are interested in understanding why Mike Farris endorsed Pete Snyder, let’s take a look at their history. One thing Pete Snyder did a very good job of as Victory Director was social conservative outreach. At times when Boston was clamping down on social conservative outreach, Pete Snyder repeatedly stood up and pushed back against Boston to give social conservatives working for Victory the leeway they needed to do their job. As part of that outreach he worked hard to reach out to Mike Farris. Mike Farris was very much on the fence in 2012. It was the direct result of Pete Snyder’s outreach to Mike Farris that set up his one-on-one meeting with Mitt Romney. The meeting with Mitt Romney and Pete Snyder’s outreach were crucial to Mike Farris deciding to vote for Mitt Romney.
This relationship with Pete Snyder developed into a working relationship on Mike Farris’s most important issue. Over the last half dozen years Mike Farris’s top issue has been the assault on parental rights. He started ParentalRights.org, went back to school for an LLM in international law, and has generally poured more energy into this issue than any other single issue.
The insinuation in the previous post that Farris’s endorsement was conditioned on a backing by Snyder for a previously unheard of Senate run isn’t just innocent speculation. It’s an outright accusation that the endorsement was a bribe aimed at kneecapping Mike Farris all because some people don’t agree with his endorsement.
Republicans can disagree with candidates within their own party. They can even disagree with endorsements made. But the moment we begin to engage in the politics of personal assassination in an effort to score points in an ongoing battle against a candidate we go too far.
Are we to begin to attack every endorsement that is made of candidates we do not support? We saw this in last year’s U.S. Senate primary as candidates and campaigns lashed out at organizations and individuals who they thought should have backed them.
THIS IS NOT A WINNING STRATEGY
Conventions and Primaries can be contentious. Feelings will get hurt and egos may get bruised. But we can not burn bridges within our own party in an effort to score points.
The previous post made assumptions and cast aspersions on Mike Farris’s reasons for endorsing Pete Snyder, ignoring the history between the two men. It created “proof” of endorsement but to what end? By trying to weaken Pete Snyder, the post attacked Mike Farris, a man who deserves better than this. Especially among fellow Republicans.