[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 155: Endorsement Policy Amendment: GPCA Endorsements for General Election Candidates

Thu Feb 22 13:20:51 PST 2018

Indeed. It should be explicit that helping build a party with a vile anti
human track record is against the 10KV... :)

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 12:52 james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com> wrote:

> However I would not support endorsing any Democrats, or Republicans.
>
> On Feb 22, 2018 12:45 PM, "james clark" <faygodrinkit at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would support the friendly amendment to add "and supports the 10 key
>> values" to the proposal. While I agree with Nicole about the allocation of
>> time, I also believe that building a coalition of non corporate party's and
>> independent candidates can help us grow into a more formidable force. It
>> would also help our candidates gain support in the future. On the
>> international level, these coalitions we're essential to greens taking
>> office.
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2018 12:01 PM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Party resources also include the time and effort which would be necessary
>> for committees and working groups to execute a process to determine whether
>> or not an endorsement is appropriate.
>>
>> Seeing how, in this cycle, CCWG failed to identify two Greens running for
>> Governor, it would seem our resources are already spread thin and we
>> should, instead, turn our focus inward before branching out.
>> On Feb 22, 2018 10:09 AM, "Sadie Fulton" <sadie.fulton at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> An endorsement doesn't have to imply lots of resources. I think that's
>>> part of the disagreement here. For me an endorsement is just a show of
>>> support, not an implication of money or volunteer hours to follow.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 10:07 Sadie Fulton <sadie.fulton at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have an example: Bernie Sanders
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 10:06 Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I cannot recall any examples of politicians we have railed against for
>>>>> putting party over principles. I do not think this is a major concern in
>>>>> our struggles for political reforms, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our main objective within the internal party structure, is to promote
>>>>> the Green Party through our pillars and values, not to exhaust resources
>>>>> helping others who may or may not help us in return.
>>>>> On Feb 22, 2018 9:56 AM, "Jeff Lebow" <jlebow at socal.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m for endorsing candidates that share Green values. We rail against
>>>>>> politicians that put party over principles. We should not do the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 20, 2018, at 2:00 PM, james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Missed the "part of a party that excepts corporate donations" part.
>>>>>> Lol.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 20, 2018 1:59 PM, "james clark" <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would be able to support this only if it included restrictions
>>>>>>> against endorsing Democrats and Republicans, and all endorsements be
>>>>>>> presented to registered voters to decide.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2018 12:44 PM, "GPCA Votes" <gpca.votes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>>>>>> <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ranked Choice Vote ID #155
>>>>>>>> Ranked Choice Vote *Endorsement Policy Amendment: GPCA
>>>>>>>> Endorsements for General Election Candidates*
>>>>>>>> Ranked Choice Vote Administrators: Victoria Ashley, Brian Good,
>>>>>>>> Laura Wells, Eric Brooks, Mike Goldbeck
>>>>>>>> Discussion  02/12/2018 - 03/25/2018
>>>>>>>> Voting  03/26/2018 - 04/01/2018
>>>>>>>> Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Background*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Green Party of California is currently prohibited from
>>>>>>>> endorsing candidates who have good Green values and who take no corporate
>>>>>>>> money: the GPCA needs visibility, in a positive way, and putting our name
>>>>>>>> on endorsement lists of good candidates is one way to get the Green Party
>>>>>>>> name in the public eye.  The GPCA wants to help voters vote for good
>>>>>>>> candidates, even in races where we have no candidate.  For instance, the
>>>>>>>> Peace and Freedom Party can and does endorse Green Party candidates in
>>>>>>>> state and federal races, but the GPCA is prohibited from endorsing Peace
>>>>>>>> and Freedom candidates.  The GPCA currently cannot endorse candidates with
>>>>>>>> No Party Preference or any other voter registration, even when we have no
>>>>>>>> candidate running in the race.  The GPCA cannot help voters differentiate
>>>>>>>> between good candidates who are aligned with Green values and take no
>>>>>>>> corporate money and bad candidates (who may speak well) from the two-party
>>>>>>>> system.  The current endorsement policy is confusing: county parties are
>>>>>>>> not prohibited from endorsing candidates who are not Green, but the state
>>>>>>>> party is; in addition, it precludes a possible endorsement even in the face
>>>>>>>> of grassroots interest.  The current endorsement policy was promulgated in
>>>>>>>> the pre-Top-Two era, and, if left unreformed, will further hobble
>>>>>>>> party-building efforts in California.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Changing the endorsement policy would advance the party’s attempts
>>>>>>>> to implement Proportional Representation so that we can have a multi-party
>>>>>>>> system and not a two-party system. By expanding our endorsement options, we
>>>>>>>> will demonstrate that we will work in coalitions and will endorse
>>>>>>>> candidates who have green values, but who choose other political party
>>>>>>>> affiliations.  As it stands, people who want to “throw their hat in the
>>>>>>>> ring” and yet who have no track record with the Green Party or allied
>>>>>>>> organizations are able to register Green and use our ballot line, and get
>>>>>>>> an automatic advantage in the endorsement process, even though they may not
>>>>>>>> be the best candidate.  Moreover, given that there are many public
>>>>>>>> perceptions over which Greens have very little control, such as being
>>>>>>>> marginalized or cast as “spoilers” or “third-party” candidates who “can’t
>>>>>>>> win,” the endorsement area is one we can control.  We can avoid
>>>>>>>> marginalizing ourselves as people who are only interested in the label
>>>>>>>> “Green Party,” not the green values that we share with millions of ordinary
>>>>>>>> folks in the nation and certainly in California.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Furthermore, it is common advice in social media, for example (and
>>>>>>>> even in life), that if you want likes, followers and friends, you’ve got to
>>>>>>>> like, follow and friend others, as long as you stay true to your values. We
>>>>>>>> need to reciprocate and be proactive, not sit back and wait for everyone to
>>>>>>>> switch to “team Green Party,” while we display an unwelcoming attitude.
>>>>>>>> People want a new party, but our current restrictive endorsement procedures
>>>>>>>> make us look as if we do not want to be an “umbrella party” or “big tent”
>>>>>>>> for all people who are aligned with our values and stances. It looks like
>>>>>>>> we want to remain a small, exclusive “third” party with a narrow
>>>>>>>> “sectarian” view of how change happens.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Accordingly, we recommend the following changes to the GPCA
>>>>>>>> Endorsement Policy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Proposal*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That the current GPCA Endorsement Policy be amended as follows:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That the policy be amended from its current text:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GPCA CANDIDATE ENDORSEMENT POLICY FOR GENERAL ELECTIONS (approved
>>>>>>>> by the GPCA General Assembly, June 25, 2006, 43-6-2)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. The GPCA shall not make any endorsements of General Election
>>>>>>>> candidates who are not Green Party members.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To read as follow:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GPCA CANDIDATE ENDORSEMENT POLICY FOR ELECTIONS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. The GPCA shall not make endorsements of candidates who accept
>>>>>>>> corporate campaign contributions or who belong to any political party that
>>>>>>>> accepts corporate campaign contributions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sponsors: This proposal has been endorsed and sponsored by the
>>>>>>>> Green Party of Yolo County.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Full details will be available at:
>>>>>>>> http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_bylaw_interpretations
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>>>>>>> <gpca-votes at 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180222/3d6b68d2/attachment.html>