A little late, but oh well. At least I know their thinking. This is the reply I got from one of their board members and thought maybe everyone would like to read in case this is brought up again. </font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /> Well I can see your confusion &#8211; why would an off-road org endorse someone that is seemingly liberal - well it&#8217;s just part of the game really. As an exec BOD member of CLORV I can say that CLORV has accomplished a lot for our community and looks at each endorsement for the greater good. They host a lobbying Day each year where those participating fly up to Sac for a 4 day stay and get trained and then go talk to the senators and assemblyman in our state and lobby for our rights. We actually hit the dems hard and then stop by and say hi to our supporters. I went this year and it was an eye opener in the process. CLORV is a lobbying group &#8211; lobbying in Sacramento for off-roaders rights. Endorsing candidates and doing everything to ensure that those in power are going to be pro-land use and pro-off-road. As Kalifornia is a democratic state with the executive and legislative branches being both dems, CLORV looks at the possibility of who will win in an area and determines based on their responses to the questionnaires that are sent out, who is pro-land use and pro-off-road, based on the responses they will endorse the best possible candidate in a district. And sometimes if in a certain district a liberal is favored and seems to be pro-off road, then they will get the endorsement. There are several dems that own a bike or atv and mention in their responses that they go off-roading with their families. During our lobbying day we were educating the legislative members about bills introduced that were harmful to recreation &#8211; CLORV determined who needed to be visited, what bills we opposed and what bills we favored. CLORV looks at who will most likely be in power and who will be willing to look at our side of things. If we play party lines in a state where the liberals hold the cards, we won&#8217;t get anywhere &#8211; there must be some sort of balance. The endorsements are done via committee. For example ~ In March I sat with the rest of CLORV board as we were trying to decide who to endorse for Governor. Rirdon didn't win the GOP nomination so now we had to decide....It was a tough decision, who should we pick? Simon or Davis? Davis is more middle of the road, Simon more conservative. How are people going to vote? Who is going to win? Who is willing to work with us? That is what CLORV must try and predict ....so we said okay Simon most likely won't take Kalifornia, he is too conservative for the voting populus. So the question is do we endorse Simon and alienate Davis who has been pro-off road? Or endorse Davis over Simon who is more conservative and may be better overall for Cali? There is the dilemma...in the end weighing all the factors and odds...Davis got the nod over Simon from an off-road view point. You may not agree - but that is how this game is played. Many members of the CLORV BOD are campaigning for Simon, but CLORV has endorsed Davis for two reasons 1. he has put people in charge of OHVMR who are fantastic and great to work with 2. He&#8217;ll most likely win and we want to keep him as an ally. [/ QUOTE ] Well, there it is in black and white, or whatever screen colors that you have setup at your "my home" screen. I'd say that I'd go about stuff a little different route.