[Lnc-business] Fwd: Re: [Lnc-votes] February LNC Meeting

[Joshua Katz]

In light of Mr. Frankel's comments, I would be less hesitant to participate
in a publicity event than previously indicated (although probably not any
more able due to my schedule).

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org> wrote:

>
> -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [Lnc-votes]
> [Lnc-business] February LNC Meeting Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 09:53:13 -0600 From:
> travellingcircus at gmail.com To: Joshua Katz <jalankatz at gmail.com>
> <jalankatz at gmail.com>, Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org>
> <wes.benedict at lp.org>, James W. Lark, III <jwl3s at virginia.edu>
> <jwl3s at virginia.edu>, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> <ludlow at gmail.com>,
> Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com> <danielehayes at icloud.com>
>
> Please share with LNC.
>
>
> Dr. Lark wrote
>
>
> * "*  If I understand correctly, the LP Oklahoma is allowed to conduct
> only one submission of signatures in its petitioning effort.  If so, then
> if the deadline for submission of signatures is at least a week later than
> Feb. 22, my gut feeling is that the signatures should not be submitted on
> or about Feb. 22.  Thus, it is not clear to me that one of the possible
> benefits of an LNC meeting in OKC (a press conference associated with the
> submission of the signatures) would materialize."*
>
> p] Fri Feb 19 should be plenty late enough to submit to the state. If we
> still have any doubt that we have enough signatures on Feb 19, hopefully at
> least some of the LNC members (obviously not all and I don't expect most)
> will pick up a few signatures themselves while they are here instead. But I
> think we are well on track to have more than enough signatures well before
> then, with the only question being at what point LNC wants to cut the
> funding to get additional padding.
>
> p] I realize not all, and quite likely not most, of the LNC will be here
> in time for the turn-in, but even having a few of the key LNC members here
> would add to the impact. More so even than if Nick Sarwark flies out here
> by himself.
>
> p] The Oklahoma Party has had to overcome ballot access barriers like no
> other state. They could use a shot in the arm. The ballot access barriers
> here should get maximum possible publicity. OKLP is doing well with
> prospective candidate recruitment. They have also done a lot given the
> ballot access circumstances to be publicly visible with issue coalitions
> and public events. Tina told me they are on the cusp of winning the support
> of a large chunk of the small-l and generally-POed-at-poor-duopoly-choices
> communities here. A shot in the arm could go a long way.
>
> p] I am trying to put together an event or several with several of the
> campaigns for the presidential nomination. Liberty on Tap OKC is that
> Thursday (Feb 18). If LNC meeting is 20-21 and the state turn in is Feb 19
> that would give us a core of dates to try to plan around. Johnson of NM,
> Kerbel and Petersen all expressed tentative interest in personal
> conversation but dates have not been worked out or specific events
> but what I had in mind was a college appearance or several (mini-tour?),
> maybe some debates/joint appearances between the campaigns. I was hoping
> for January but Tina and Larry Kelly think it's not enough time to promote
> and organize the events that quickly. In conjunction with the state turn in
> and the LNC meeting would be good as well. I can try to fit in a few
> college dates right before or after.
>
> p] It could also serve as the official kickoff for some of the state and
> local candidates' campaigns. Plus, maybe we can get more of them if the LNC
> shows up, as some people haven't decided whether to run or not yet.
>
> p] We are one day or less drive for many active nearby state parties, such
> as much (probably most) of the Texas membership and some others. Dallas is
> about 3 hours drive from OKC.
>
> p] Finally, and I am sure this will be THE top consideration for the LNC
> on where to have its meeting, for once I won't have to travel to cover the
> LNC meeting for IPR because the meeting will come to me. Please, no "in
> Soviet Russia" or "in Soviet Oklahoma" jokes.
>
>
> Thanks everyone,
>
> -paulie
> 205-534-1622
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160106/7ac99585/attachment-0002.html>