[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Resignation of SGA Delegacy

Tue Feb 20 20:07:23 PST 2018

Also very concerning throughout this thread is the latest argument of "what
if nazis run as greens?" This fear-mongering to pass a proposal has no
place in our pillars & values.

So. Um. Let's design a way for a small group of individuals decide who is
"good" and "bad?" Does this mean we call opposition "Hillary Supporter" and
GPCA will issue a statement of opposition? Where is the line drawn there?
How do we feel about Bernie supporters, then?

On Feb 20, 2018 7:59 PM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:

> It doesn't seem GP Sac is making the argument that having multiple
> candidates is a good thing. We also did not vote as a county party to
> endorse/oppose this proposal, so please do not address GP Sacramento
> members in a general way.
>
> ENDORSING one over others who have all been campaigning this whole time is
> the problem. Starting this process NOW, after candidates qualified, without
> anyone expecting an endorsement vote is a problem.
>
> "Multiple candidates don’t help build the party. Good candidates help
> build the party. "
>
> Define "good." This is subjective. If you were concerned about
> concentrating support behind single candidates, this could have been
> strategically avoided by running for an office in which another Green had
> not filed intent for so it makes no sense for you to be arguing in favor of
> this now.
>
> -N
>
> P.S. Your recollections of social media posts are inaccurate. Please cease
> your libelous statements of others and myself and please consider choosing
> your words very carefully as they reflect on the entire state party.
> On Feb 20, 2018 7:32 PM, "Erik" <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wait... all of a sudden having multiple candidates is a good thing? I
>> thought Green Party of Sacramento members were the ones taking to social
>> media and listserves claiming that my candidacy for Secretary of State was
>> an attempt to “split the vote” and “running Greens against Greens”, etc.
>>
>> I recall Nicole Castor, James Clark calling me a “highjacker” along with
>> Jacob Bloom in a FB Group called “Annoying Rats That Eat Holes in Erik
>> Rydberg GPCA Spokesperson”. A couple months ago they said I was an
>> inexperienced candidate compared to the long time establishment candidate
>> Mike Feinstein.
>>
>> Now multiple candidates is a good thing and multiple candidates help
>> build the party?
>>
>> Multiple candidates don’t help build the party. Good candidates help
>> build the party.
>>
>> This endorsement process helps us indentify good candidates. If I were to
>> get an endorsement from GPCA that would not make me an “establishment
>> candidate.“ Surly a member of the Young Greens of the United States
>> couldn’t be an establishment candidate over a “Co-Founder” of the Green
>> Party of California?
>>
>> If you can’t garner support from Delegates appointed by County Councils
>> in the amount of a 2/3rds vote. Your probably not a good candidate and the
>> Green Party of California’s Delegates don’t have faith in you to win or to
>> appropriately represent GPCA.
>>
>> Nobody can stop you from running... but you don’t get to run around
>> saying whatever you want like the Green Party of California supports  you.
>> If we don’t create this process then racists and Trump supporters can run
>> on the Green Party ballot and we’ll have no way to distance ourselves or
>> voice our disapproval.
>>
>> Do we want Hillary/Trump supporters running on our ballot and everybody
>> thinking we support them?
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:40 PM Dee See <artaed at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you, Sadie. Onward to a better world!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018, Sadie Fulton <sadie.fulton at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "The fact that only the candidates who had prior knowledge of this
>>>> proposal we're the only ones lobbying the SGA s problematic."
>>>>
>>>> There's no evidence of this so-called fact. Nobody has been "lobbying
>>>> the SGAs". The only people regularly trying to sway the discussion on this
>>>> listserv are the people opposed to this proposal.
>>>>
>>>> I would urge Greens not to get bogged down in this endless circular
>>>> arguing. We need to focus our discussions instead on how we can build our
>>>> movement and party and how best to take advantage of the truly historic
>>>> opportunity ahead of us to become a serious campaigning force that could
>>>> make a concrete difference in the world.
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking forward to meeting as many of you as possible out on the
>>>> road at Josh's campaign stops - which are actual campaign events, aimed at
>>>> the general public, not merely at SGA delegates, as everyone who has
>>>> attended one can attest.
>>>>
>>>> Namaste.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:23 PM james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The fact that only the candidates who had prior knowledge of this
>>>>> proposal we're the only ones lobbying the SGA s problematic. Also having
>>>>> delegates tell voters who to vote for us undemocratic and takes voice away
>>>>> from registered greens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should we work on an inclusive process for the next election cycle,
>>>>> yes. That process should not be where a small group of delegates decides
>>>>> the candidates, but should be a vote by registered voters.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 20, 2018 10:03 AM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> SGA delegates are appointed/elected by active County Councils. The
>>>>>> County Councils aim to represent the county Greens as "constituents."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The general Green population of a county does not have the power to
>>>>>> replace the GA/SGA delegates, except in the case of a General Meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GA/SGA delegates are the primary decision-making body of the GPCA, so
>>>>>> are voting on internal structure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://cagreens.org/ga
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://cagreens.org/sga/2017-2018/delegates
>>>>>> On Feb 20, 2018 9:30 AM, "Lauren Mauricio" <
>>>>>> lauren_mauricio at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the SGA is supposed to represent the Greens in their county, then
>>>>>>> it is their job to connect with Greens on the local level (their
>>>>>>> "constituents" so to speak).  So campaigning to the SGA is an excellent
>>>>>>> strategy for reaching more Greens across the state.  Unless you think the
>>>>>>> SGA is not doing their job and are disconnected from or not listening to
>>>>>>> the Greens in their county.  In which case, the Greens in their county have
>>>>>>> the power to replace them.  But it makes no sense to fault someone
>>>>>>> for running a smart campaign.  In fact, we should be encouraging it if we
>>>>>>> want to win.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lauren Mauricio
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>> *From:* gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of
>>>>>>> james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 18, 2018 11:15 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Resignation of SGA Delegacy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Erik rydberg, what is forward thinking about violating the key value
>>>>>>> of decentralization? Why are fighting so hard for motion that would
>>>>>>> centralize power, and essentially be no better than the Democrats and their
>>>>>>> super delegates?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How is putting greens against each other good? Most candidates I've
>>>>>>> spoken to personally are working together to support each other's campaign,
>>>>>>> yet those in favor of this proposal are running against those greens,
>>>>>>> including lobbying the SGA prior to this proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This has been happening while other candidates that had no idea such
>>>>>>> a proposal would be brought forth at the last minute. As such, they were
>>>>>>> campaigning outside of the delegates circle to aquire the signatures needed
>>>>>>> to be placed on the ballot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is yet another problematic issue. Those who lobbied the SGA did
>>>>>>> so knowing about this proposal, and focused on winning over the delegates.
>>>>>>> Those who didn't, went and recruited people to sign their petitions from
>>>>>>> outside of the circle. That means that a vote by delegates would be
>>>>>>> unfairly influenced by those who new ahead of time about this proposal, but
>>>>>>> would not acknowledge the work growing the party other candidates put
>>>>>>> forth, since they were actually campaigning outside of our inner circles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stop trying to pit greens against greens, we gain more by working as
>>>>>>> a team and supporting each candidate in their efforts to reach new people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 18, 2018 6:13 AM, "Chris" <chris at bestofbroadway.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good afternoon fellow Greens,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are presently meeting at Grant High School in Sacramento. I am
>>>>>>> posting this notification of my resignation as a delegate to the SGA body.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sacramento County has a single vacancy for a FIFTH SGA delegate. At
>>>>>>> this meeting, there are two applicants for that role. In order to
>>>>>>> accommodate both persons, I have waived my SGA delegacy. Our new delegates
>>>>>>> are Randy Hicks and in my former position, Sid Akbar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will be remaining as an alternate, and unsubscribe my myself from
>>>>>>> all discussions for the upcoming votes, having said my peace.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ask for your support on behalf of Veronika Fimbres in your ranked
>>>>>>> choice decisions. It is my wish to see all candidates receive a 2/3
>>>>>>> majority endorsement. There is confusion as to whether this vote is to
>>>>>>> endorse or select candidates. We need to remember the green pillar of
>>>>>>> grassroots democracy and resist the urge to influence the state's mind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have confirmed between Josh, Veronika, and myself that each of our
>>>>>>> campaigns will persist if an endorsement is not granted, and there is no
>>>>>>> foundation for conflict on this issue. I request of the GPCA councils and
>>>>>>> coordinating committee a pledge not to intervene in the campaigns of
>>>>>>> unendorsed candidates until June 6th, after the state primary is over.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are all greens.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you all for your time. I remain a registered Green candidate
>>>>>>> for Governor and endorse Randy Hicks for Coordinating Committee/Council.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wish Sid all the best and know his input will be well heard by
>>>>>>> this forum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> God bless,
>>>>>>> Christopher Carlson
>>>>>>> 916.704.0058 <(916)%20704-0058>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2018, at 2:43 PM, Erik <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another huge lack of forward thinking being put forth by people
>>>>>>> opposing this new process of endorsement is that we have smaller
>>>>>>> corporate-free parties wanting our endorsements and even considering
>>>>>>> running their candidates within our party to focus progressive power and
>>>>>>> limiting the fracturing of the progressive vote. We need to form an
>>>>>>> Independent 3rd Party Coalition with other Socialist Parties.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Green Party is the  only Socialist party big enough to run
>>>>>>> candidates in almost every state. Our allies in other parties need our
>>>>>>> structure and we need their  Numbers and candidates. I’m sure there is some
>>>>>>> puritanical secterian argument on why we should continue to do nothing
>>>>>>> about that as well. I’m tired of watching the Green Party do nothing or
>>>>>>> very little. We need this endorsement process for the future and now so we
>>>>>>> can bring Independents and corporate-free Socialist Parties to the table
>>>>>>> and exponential grow our membership and candidate selection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Maine Green-Independent Party hyphenated their name while
>>>>>>> simultaneously opening up those Ballot Access and they are now running the
>>>>>>> most candidates of any state party with 38 compared to GPCA’s 18. They are
>>>>>>> also the first State Green Party in American history being formed in 1984.
>>>>>>> They clearly have some wisdom that we have yet to realize considering that
>>>>>>> our doors are closed to Independents and GPCA has Closed Primaries.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need a early Independent 3rd Party Primary System that includes
>>>>>>> Socialist Parties and Corporate-Free Independents to focus Power on
>>>>>>> corporate-free  Parties.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we fail to do this another 3rd Party will like Progressive
>>>>>>> Independent Party or Movement for A People’s Party and we will have missed
>>>>>>> a golden opportunity that we may never recover from.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 2:14 PM Lauren Mauricio <
>>>>>>> lauren_mauricio at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We really *should* be "pandering" to Berniecrats, though.  I was a
>>>>>>> Berniecrat.  I voted for Jill Stein because someone shared a link in Bernie
>>>>>>> Sanders' Dank Meme Stash (Facebook group) to a website that showed how her
>>>>>>> platform matched Bernie Sanders' by 99%.  So I voted Green and never looked
>>>>>>> back.  If whoever-that-Green-was hadn't pandered to me, I would have voted
>>>>>>> for Hillary Clinton and I would still be a begrudged Democrat to this day.
>>>>>>> I know a lot of people who share the same story.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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:* Friday, February 16, 2018 9:26 AM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *To:* GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement
>>>>>>> for Governor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com> 530-781-2903
>>>>>>> <(530)%20781-2903> *
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>> 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 <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com>530-781-2903
>> <(530)%20781-2903>*
>>
>>                 cagreens.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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/20180220/7deef371/attachment.html>