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

Sun Feb 18 06:49:11 PST 2018

That’s a glitch in the email list system we are using (which has very sensitive spam filters) and it has happened to both supporters and opponents of the proposal.

I think that having images or HTML in your email sometimes triggers it. So just send text only and you should be ok.

Eric Brooks
SGA Vote Administrator

From: gpca-votes [mailto:gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org] On Behalf Of james clark
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 9:00 PM
To: Gary Blenner <blendogg at yahoo.com>; GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for Governor

Why are people's oppositional comments being marked as spam??

On Feb 17, 2018 8:39 PM, "Gary" <blendogg at yahoo.com<mailto:blendogg at yahoo.com>> wrote:
I have not chimed in on an SGA discussion thread before, but I wanted to put my two cents in on this issue.

I'm concerned that if we start endorsing primary candidates at the state level, we'll be creating two camps: a Green Party "establishment" choice presented to the voters and Party "outsiders". Rather than dividing the Party by having "insiders" and "outsiders" in every campaign, we should be focusing on unifying the Party...... and getting rid of top two in favor of IRV and PR. Otherwise, we'll be following the path of the Dems & Reps.  Party endorsements can happen at the grassroots if each County Council chooses, but the state party should stay out of it.

Gary

________________________________
From: Ann Menasche <aemenasche at gmail.com<mailto:aemenasche at gmail.com>>
To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>>
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for Governor

I think given the dilemma we are in with Top Two, we really have no choice if we hope to maximize our vote and ensure that we maintain our ballot status but to unite around one candidate. In fact, everyone who is to the Left of the Dems should all be working together and uniting behind a common slate.
Ann

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 16, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Erik <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com<mailto:erikrydberg34 at gmail.com>> wrote:
Identifying the strongest candidate is the best strategy to achieve every goal we want. The strongest candidate will get 2%, build the party and potentially win. Especially if the state party stops hamstringing itself and actually participated in these candidates campaigns and sent out email blasts and helped raise fund. The “You’re on you own strategy.” is unbelievablely lazy and backward. GPCAshould have been publicizing it’s Candidates in January. We have to start being “ahead of the curve.” We can not afford to continue being behind it.

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:13 AM Anthony Krzywicki <chefkrzywicki at gmail.com<mailto:chefkrzywicki at gmail.com>> wrote:
In it to win it is the point of getting 2% then, right?   Doesn’t having one candidate give us a better opportunity to get that 2% ?

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:22 AM Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:jmc at sfgreens.org>)
http://sfgreens.org/

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

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto: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<http://www.venturacountygreenparty.com>
greenpartyvc at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto: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<http://www.venturacountygreenparty.com>
greenpartyvc at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:erikrydberg34 at gmail.com>
530-781-2903
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwoNOQ4fkz_VOXJOSHI4UTUxU0k&revid=0BwoNOQ4fkz_VR0pMejQ3S0c4OWg0Nk9Pc2ZqSEhJNzZDbzZ3PQ]
                cagreens.org

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

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto: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/20180218/d544af36/attachment.html>