"Maybe I'm not gay enough. HRC hasn't really been supportive of the campaign for their own reasons, and they're entitled to do so. But elections are won not by endorsements but by votes. That's just how it works. I'm not trying to rack up endorsements. I'm trying to rack up votes."
-- Openly gay Senate candidate Jim Neal in response to questions by the Washington Blade about HRC's snub of his candidacy. Jim is also a Bilerico Project contributor.







Comment on this entry
Are you saying that HRC should endorse Jim because he is gay and not hold him to the same PAC criteria that they would other candidates to?
Michael Crawford | April 30, 2008 10:19 AM
No, Michael. As I said on the earlier thread, I think they should endorse him because he is openly gay and better on our issues than his primary opponent and Republican officeholder.
HRC is dedicated to LGBT equality. For them not to endorse the candidate who is most gay friendly - let alone gay himself - doesn't seem to be doing the best for the LGBT community. That's what might be best for HRC in case he loses.
He wouldn't stand as large of a chance of losing, however, if HRC and Victory Fund would support him by mobilizing volunteers, fundraising and PAC contributions.
It's too late now though - so I guess this is all crying over spilt milk.
Bil Browning | April 30, 2008 10:28 AM
To help avoid spam, all comments from unregistered users are held for moderation.