Spread the love

Is Endorsement Name Dropping a Good Political Strategy or Just Bad Idea?

Campaigning on endorsements alone is a bad idea

Section 1: Introduction

When it comes to political campaigning, endorsements from prominent figures can be a powerful tool to sway voters. However, relying solely on endorsements to win an election is a bad idea. In this blog post, we will explore the reasons why this is the case and why candidates need to focus on more than just endorsements to secure a victory.

Firstly, let’s define what we mean by a political endorsement. It is a public declaration of support for a candidate or issue by an individual or organization, usually in the form of a statement or press release. Endorsements can come from a variety of sources, including politicians, celebrities, unions, and interest groups.

While endorsements can be valuable to a campaign, they are not a guarantee of success. In fact, relying too much on endorsements can actually backfire and harm a candidate’s chances of winning.

Section 2: Endorsements don’t equal votes

One of the biggest problems with relying on endorsements is that they don’t always translate into votes. Just because a well-known figure endorses a candidate doesn’t mean that their supporters will automatically follow suit.

For example, a celebrity endorsement might generate a lot of buzz on social media, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that their millions of followers are going to vote for that candidate. Voters are more likely to be swayed by issues that affect them personally, rather than the opinions of famous people.

Furthermore, some voters might be turned off by a candidate who is perceived as being too reliant on endorsements. They might see it as a sign that the candidate doesn’t have a strong platform or the ability to connect with voters on their own. This can be especially damaging in local elections, where personal connections and community involvement are often more important than national endorsements.

Section 3: Endorsements can be divisive

Another problem with endorsements is that they can be divisive. If a candidate receives an endorsement from a controversial figure or organization, it can turn off potential supporters who disagree with that endorsement.

For example, if a candidate receives an endorsement from a group that is known for its extreme views on a particular issue, it might alienate voters who don’t share those views. This can be especially damaging in a close race, where every vote counts.

In addition, endorsements can also create a perception of elitism or insider politics. If a candidate is perceived as being too cozy with powerful interests, it can turn off voters who are looking for someone who represents their interests and values.

Section 4: Endorsements can distract from the real issues

When candidates rely too much on endorsements, it can distract from the real issues that voters care about. Instead of focusing on their platform and the problems facing their constituents, candidates might spend more time courting endorsements and trying to win over influential people.

This can be especially frustrating for voters who are looking for real solutions to the challenges they face. They might see a candidate who is more interested in impressing celebrities or powerful interests as out of touch or disconnected from their daily lives.

Furthermore, endorsements can also overshadow a candidate’s actual record or qualifications. Voters might be more interested in a candidate’s experience and accomplishments than in who has endorsed them.

Section 5: Endorsements can be misleading

Another problem with endorsements is that they can be misleading. Just because someone endorses a candidate doesn’t mean that they know that candidate well or agree with all of their positions.

For example, a politician might endorse a candidate from their own party simply because they feel obligated to do so, even if they don’t know much about that candidate’s platform. This can lead to endorsements that are more about politics and alliances than about the candidate’s actual qualifications or ability to do the job.

Similarly, endorsements can be bought or traded, which can make them less meaningful. If a candidate is able to secure endorsements by making promises or offering favors, it can create a perception that they are not trustworthy or that they are beholden to special interests.

Section 6: Endorsements are not a substitute for hard work

Ultimately, endorsements are not a substitute for hard work and a strong campaign strategy. Candidates who rely too much on endorsements are unlikely to win if they don’t have a solid platform, a clear message, and a well-organized campaign.

Winning an election requires more than just endorsements. Candidates need to be able to connect with voters, articulate their vision for the future, and demonstrate their ability to get things done. They need to be willing to put in the time and effort to build relationships with voters, listen to their concerns, and earn their trust.

In short, endorsements can be a valuable asset to a campaign, but they are not a substitute for the hard work and dedication that it takes to win an election and they do not make a candidate entitled.

Section 7: The danger of over reliance on endorsements

When candidates rely too much on endorsements, they run the risk of alienating voters and losing sight of what really matters. They might become too focused on impressing powerful interests or courting celebrity endorsements, instead of listening to the needs of their constituents.

This can create a perception that the candidate is out of touch or disconnected from the community they are trying to serve. It can also make it harder for them to build the kind of grassroots support that is essential for winning elections.

Furthermore, candidates who are too reliant on endorsements might also struggle to govern effectively if they do win. They might be seen as beholden to special interests or unable to make tough decisions that go against the wishes of their backers.

Section 8: Conclusion

In conclusion, while endorsements can be a valuable tool for political campaigns, they are not a guarantee of success. Candidates who rely too much on endorsements run the risk of alienating voters, distracting from the real issues, and creating a perception of elitism or insider politics.

To win an election, candidates need to have a well-rounded campaign strategy that includes more than just endorsements. They need to be willing to put in the hard work, build relationships with voters, and demonstrate their ability to lead. Only then can they hope to secure a victory and represent their constituents effectively.

Section 9: Final thoughts

Remember, endorsements can be a useful tool, but they should never be the centerpiece of a campaign. Candidates need to focus on what really matters: connecting with voters, addressing their concerns, and demonstrating their ability to lead. By doing so, they can build a campaign that is more than just a collection of endorsements, and win the support of their constituents.

Jeniffer Wexton on:

public Safety

Crime has vaulted near the top of voters’ concerns, just after the economy and inflation. According to Gallup, 80 percent of Americans worry “a great deal” or a “fair amount” about crime, the highest level in two decades.


Such fears pose yet another midterm election hurdle for Democrats, on top of public angst over soaring prices and President Biden’s dismal public approval ratings.


As a former prosecutor, substitute judge, legal advocate for children, state Senator, and as a legislator, Jennifer Wexton should be well aware that our society is a dangerous place. Wexton should understand that our children, the elderly, and everyone else in between needs to be protected from violent criminals and repeat offenders. She ignores this and advocates on their behalf with light sentences, “no cash bail”, Criminal Justice Reform, and Restorative Justice.


Do you recall the rape of a (15) year old girl in a Loudoun County High School bathroom in May 2021 by a transgendered student? If this wasn’t bad enough, “Criminal Justice Reform” allowed for the rapists sentenced to be reduced, removing him from the sexual assault registry and providing supervised probation. To make matters worse, the Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler IGNORED the federally mandated processes and procedures when incidents of this nature occur, and now Wexton is abolishing Title IX protections under HR5-Equality Act.


Jennifer Wexton got the ball rolling on the rapists lenient sentence by introducing Bill NO. 1082 in 2017, which passed (and she’s proud of it, see video during meeting with NAACP).

In 2019, Wexton proudly endorsed Buta Biberaj for Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney. Prior to being elected, Biberaj was the legal redress for the Loudoun NAACP; this is not an insignificant detail. Biberaj also belongs to the Virginia Progressive Prosecutors For Justice. The VPPFJ’s primary goal is “Criminal Justice Reform” or “Restorative Justice”.


Wexton, Biberaj are closely aligned Progressive ideologues and share questionable associations with a variety of organizations and people.

Who could forget the Black Lives Matter riots of 2020 over George Floyd. Wexton is so radical that she sponsored the “George Floyd Justice Policing Act” (defund the police) and the “Mental Health Justice Act” that allowed for increased funding for social workers that are meant to take the place of police officers around the country.


These are only a few examples of what Wexton and the Progressive Democrats “Criminal Justice Reform” and “Restorative Justice” look like for Public Safety:


More on Wexton and Public Safety

%d bloggers like this: