[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for Governor

Fri Feb 16 15:23:45 PST 2018

There is a standard to base the measure of identifying the best candidate for a given population – it is called a vote.

From: gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
Reply-To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
Date: Friday, February 16, 2018 at 3:01 PM
To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for Governor

We're not continuing a cycle of anything. This is the first time the candidate endorsement process has been held in such a non-strategic, haphazard way, and as an afterthought- ages later than it should have been implimented.

At the Sacramento GA, Campaigns & Candidates Working Group had its opportunity to reveal an election strategy for this primary but did not. There is no endorsement process listed in this strategic plan: http://www.cagreens.org/ga/2017-06/strategic-plan

"Identifying the best candidate" at this point is completely subjective and there is no standard set on which to base any type of measure for this.

Declaring your candidacy “first” has nothing to do with being the candidate most likely to win. Our objective is to win not to have 3 candidates get 2%. The Green Party of California must identify a slate of candidates every election cycle that it is confident will win a Top Two primary. Otherwise we are continuing a cycle of stagnation and inaction that has proven itself useless in statewide electoral races. If other Green candidates want to use their candidacy to raise donations for charities or to recruit new members that is their porogitive. That is not the goal of a serious statewide electoral party. We need to win state seats with credible candidates that have integrity and track records of trustworthiness. Vote yes on the endorsement process. It is never to late to make progress and turn a political party away from failed strategies. 

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:22 AM Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:

Anthony & Others,

I agree that this process should have been started at least six months ago. At this point, candidates and their teams have already done the work to get on the ballot and it is likely there will be more than one Green candidate for the offices of SOS & Governor.

If we're not in it to win it, what is the point? There is a point, actually. We will benefit from having any of the statewide candidates reaching 2%, thus securing ballot access. In addition, Green Party benefits by campaigning our platform, Key Values and the type of electoral reforms which are necessary to empower alternate parties. I do not feel it is useful to delude ourselves into thinking that we are in fact "in it to win it," because until these reforms are accomplished, we are severely disadvantaged in realistically competing to win. 

I also do not feel it is useful to put so much weight on pandering to so-called "berniecrats," as it dilutes our values in specific ways which compromises what the party actually stands for. Of course such pandering has its merit in reaching registration goals, but for a race like this, we should be careful in pretending we share more in common with that core than we really do.

There has to be a party which stands firmly against war, firmly supports environmental protections, among other issues and Sanders does not reflect these values in his actions. There are already "progressive" democrats who will woo voters with compromised ideals and so rather than GP moving to the right, we stand firm, campaign and demonstrate our values to a growing population of individuals who agree, and keep our stances so that we may secure a place for them when they realize the duopoly does not serve their interests and that these voters no longer wish to compromise their values. 

I will vote against the SGA proposal to endorse candidates at this point because it was brought in too late, serves little purpose and is proposed without a strategy which delegates could examine and decide upon. 

-Nicole Castor
GP Sacramento County

On Feb 16, 2018 7:52 AM, "Anthony Krzywicki" <chefkrzywicki at gmail.com> wrote:

Another major concern is breaking up our parties voting base.  We need to all get behind someone and that someone hopefully will reach out and get votes from independents, progressives and possibly bernicrats.  Otherwise were not in itvto win it, so then whats the point?  We have a such a small percentage of green voters to make a win, why should we split that?  

Also i beliwve that this process should be started 6 months ago, so we could already be backing a unified candidate.

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:41 PM james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com> wrote:

One major concern is that this process would take power out of the voters hands to decide which candidate best represents their values. It seems to much the DNC and their delegates picking who people get to vote for. Not to mention at several candidates already have their names on the ballot.

On Feb 15, 2018 11:14 AM, "Victoria Ashley" <victronix01 at gmail.com> wrote:

Since the vote doesn't start until late March, that would give some time to send out a list of all the GP candidates on the Inform List.

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:20 AM, John-Marc Chandonia <jmc at sfgreens.org> wrote:

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:25:47PM -0800, james clark wrote:
> I feel it is not in the best interests of the party to follow through with
> this ill timed endorsement process. If we were to perform such a process it
> should have been done prior to candidates reaching their ballot access
> goals. To do so at this juncture will only create animosity and division,
> and will not effect candidates placement on the ballot.

Don't they have until March 9 to raise funds for the ballot?  If
that's the case, we should know by the time the SGA votes who is in
and who is out.  I agree that we should not make an endorsement before
then, because we haven't had any process for informing Greens about
all the Green candidates running.

JMC
--
John-Marc Chandonia (jmc at sfgreens.org)
http://sfgreens.org/

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

-- 

Anthony J. Krzywicki,
Co-coordinator GROW- Green Party California
Co-coordinator Ventura County Green Party County Council

www.venturacountygreenparty.com

greenpartyvc at gmail.com

instagram: greenpartyvcc

facebook group: Ventura Green Party

facebook group: Ventura County Green Party

It is necessary to help others, not only in our prayers, but in our daily lives. If we find we cannot help others, the least we can do is to desist from harming them. 
-Dali Lama

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

-- 

Erik Rydberg 

Green Party of California(GPCA) Spokesperson

erikrydberg34 at gmail.com
530-781-2903

                cagreens.org

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

-- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes at sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180216/5cf3a079/attachment.html>