Turner thinks Yates has sidestepped his duty.

Gubernatorial Candidate Doug Turner has posted on Haussamen, link.

I find a few flaws in his thinking; it begins with his apparent belief in the "wisdom" of voters.

"Party officials simply must trust the wisdom of GOP voters to do what’s right and not intervene in a way that supports one candidate over another."

Who actually believes in the "wisdom" of voters?

Who actually believes that political campaigns appeal to the "wisdom" in the electorate?

If voters voted according to "wisdom", Rep Janice Arnold-Jones would be winning this thing hands down.

Turner thinks the leadership of the NMRP picked a side in the primary; Susana Martinez'.

How, by taking a stand against deceit, does one pick any side except against deceit?

Turner went on to argue that NMRP Chairman Harvey Yates "denied candidates the opportunity to defend themselves". This is simply untrue; each can defend themselves regardless of Yates' action. How have they been curtailed?

Turner wrote;

By taking sides in a primary, party officials lose the credibility they need to unite the party behind the single candidate selected by GOP voters on June 1.

How do Party officials "unite behind a candidate", knowing the candidate had deliberately misled voters before the Primary? Is the deceit somehow OK as long as the candidate wins the primary?

Turner thinks Yates abandoned his duty to remain neutral. Yates' duty to remain neutral applies to his treatment of candidates; it does not require him to ignore ethical misconduct. If there is indeed a rule that prevents any leader from standing up for what is right, then change the rule.

According to Dante;

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those
who remain neutral in times of moral crisis.

photo Mark Bralley