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

Sun Feb 18 21:29:28 PST 2018

Nicole, all,

Unless I missed someone, only three of our GPCA Coordinating Committee Members are running for one of the offices for which we would be endorsing: Angelica Duenas (CD-29; no other Greens running) and Mike Feinstein and Erik Rydberg (Secretary of State; same office; no other Green running).  I fail to see how this would be a conflict of interest.  If there was someone on the Coordinating Committee running against someone who was not, for the same office, you might have a point, but that's not the case at all.

http://www.cagreens.org/committees/coordinating

Thank you,

Lauren Mauricio

Tulare County

________________________________
From: gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 9:12 AM
To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for Governor

Wanda Jean & Others,

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

And the VOTERS have no standard to base the measure of what the "best" candidate is. The terms "best," "most viable," "most likely to win," are all subjective terms when we have no idea how to calculate this and are asked vote with a lack of objective information.

The most likely to win the SGA endorsement are not necessarily the "best" candidates, but are the ones who campaigned the most to the SGA delegates, specifically. It is also interesting to note that certain candidate's and their affiliates are Coordinating Committee members who are the very ones bringing up this proposal. Seems like a conflict of interest which I hope delegates notice.

-N

On Feb 18, 2018 9:06 AM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com<mailto:nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>> wrote:

Lauren & Others,

This is what I had said regarding pandering to Sanders' supporters and I do not wish to have my words misrepresented. I acknowledge there is merit to pandering in certain cases but that it seems a disproportionate amount of importance should not be put on it as if it will become our main objective. This is especially important considering the statistics that only around 5% of Sanders' primary voters ended up voting for Jill Stein.

"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.

Green Party is a safe space for people who want to vote their values when their values include an opposition to war, for example, which Sanders has not largely demonstrated in his political career. In a statewide race which we are unlikely to win, or make it into the top-two, campaigning our values becomes a bigger goal. We should be careful in how we present our values by way of which candidates were to endorse, that this impression does not illustrate an acceptance of supporting war and other things that the GP generally does not stand for.

-N

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<tel:(530)%20781-2903>
[https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwoNOQ4fkz_VOXJOSHI4UTUxU0k&revid=0BwoNOQ4fkz_VR0pMejQ3S0c4OWg0Nk9Pc2ZqSEhJNzZDbzZ3PQ]
                cagreens.org<http://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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180219/c6faa8e3/attachment.html>