On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 02:54:04PM -0800, Christopher Carlson wrote:
Erik, Anthony, Victoria, John-Marc,
Could any of you please address the following concern that James posted earlier? I would like to hear a rebuttal to this. "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."
James makes a good point. There are several theoretical reasons we might act as gatekeepers, but neither appears to apply this year: 1) when right wingers or other crazy people run as Greens, we should distance ourselves from them and ask voters not to support them, and 2) if we were close to losing our ballot status based on registration, which as Thomas explained, we're not. I'll be supporting endorsing all the Greens who make the ballot on March 9, unless I find out any of them fall into that first category. Having 3 candidates for Governor seems fine, since it's the only way we can be in 3 places at once! We've already gotten some very good press from one of the gubernatorial candidates in SF. I'll also point out that I don't really want to spend much energy or resources on state-level campaigns. We're not going to come close to breaking into the top two in any of the statewide races. At least in SF, we have much more potential impact on local politics and elections, and we have major local elections coming up in both June and November. I wouldn't want the GPCA to spend money on ballot access for statewide candidates; I think money would be better spent on literature and organizing. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc@sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/