Obviously a misspelling, with the intention being an "ignore-a-mouse."

This is the opponent who keeps talking about the problem of an "elephant in the room" and refuses to debate with you about the "mouse" on which you've elected to base your campaign.

Only a candidate for office should use the term.

Prior to seeing it here, I thought it to be a local term, since my area has always seemed to lead in having candidates who campaign loudly about trivia that doesn't really matter, while ignoring the DISASTERS WITH WHICH WE ARE FACED DUE TO REALLY IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT ARE HIDDEN FROM THE VOTERS (except from the few like me who are fully informed and know what is really important).

Since there are no candidates in my area's current voting who have discussed anything that actually matters (i.e. nobody's seen the elephant(s)), a more appropriate term the present crop of whiners should use would be to describe their opponents as "ignore-MY-mouse" candidates, while the opponents all pontificate about who's mouse is most important.

In the rare case when a local candidate might (accidentally?) promise to "fix" a problem that might be of concern to the community, it is always a problem totally unrelated to the jurisdiction and scope of authority of the office for which that candidate is campaigning, so it obviously shouldn't matter to his/her campaign. The frequency with which this approach appears can lead to deeply intricate debates about whether the elephant is or isn't really just another mouse (in the context of your campaign) if it's not your elephant to deal with.

John