[Lnc-business] [Lnc-votes] Project

Tue Nov 29 18:03:37 EST 2016

Hey all, sorry I have not had the chance to respond to some of the
questions asked.

1. The Trump campaign did ignore the recommendations of the report. That is
true. But the GOP didn't.
I can give you plenty of examples of how the GOP set itself up for success
despite the ignorance of the Trump campaign. But if I am not mistaken, the
GOP spent millions on Hispanic outreach and other demographics identified
by the project.

2. Even though we loose much control over the campaign, there is much the
LNC should do in the meantime so that the campaign is successful. The
project would have to identify a few of our goals moving forward. I think
we agree on this point. We should still, in my opinion, investigate an
effective relationship between state affiliates and the campaign, but that
is strictly my opinion.

3. "Messaging" has to do with how we package and present the message. The
whole message of the Trump campaign was to "Make America Great Again," and
everything he said had to do with that one line. The whole message of the
Hillary campaign was to be "Stronger Together," and everything she spoke
about had undertones of unity and her contrasts with Trump, supposedly.
What was the line of Libertarians in 2016? "You in?" "Live Free?" "Legalize
Freedom"? The reality is we need to package our message in a way that is
appealing and clear. I don't know if we did that, but I would like to see
how we can.

4. The Committee would present their best pick, but the LNC would
ultimately be the body to approve it. I have yet to revcive an answer from
the agencies I have contacted (and will continue to contact), and I don't
want to give anyone a bad number, but some individuals with more expertise
than I have told me it will cost around $500,000. I don't think we should
go cheap. This is our party's future - if we have no goals, I can't expect
that we would achieve any.

Just a couple of examples of the GOP heeding the recommendations:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/gop-launches-english-spanish-social-media-latino-outreach-campaign-n631911
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-10-24/gop-s-hispanic-outreach-could-blunt-trump-effect-in-senate-races

Thank you all for your thoughtful responses, if I failed to answer a
question please let me know.
Thank you,

*Trent Somes, III*
Region 5 Alternate, Libertarian National Committee
Founder, Westmoreland County Libertarians <http://fb.com/wclibertarians>
National Chair, Libertarian Youth Caucus <http://fb.com/LYCaucus>
Facebook <http://fb.com/trentsomes/> Twitter
<http://twitter.com/TrentSomes/> Instagram
<http://instagram.com/trentsomes/> Address <https://goo.gl/maps/gWqJw21CJZs>
Cell: (412) 496 - 8552 Home: (412) 646 - 1872

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Mr. Frankel raises an important point.  The autopsy report was, basically,
> the exact opposite of the Trump campaign.  I'm not sure what follows from
> Trump winning - maybe he'd have won more "big league" if he'd listened to
> the autopsy.  Maybe he'd have lost.  In any case, it illustrates what my
> colleague from Region 1 points out - parties lose a fair amount of control
> over that during a Presidential campaign, because the campaign becomes the
> center of attention.  So it doesn't make much sense to me for us to spend
> money being told what the 2020 campaign should look like, considering that
> it isn't up to us.  Campaigns generally come into the convention as a fetal
> form of what they'll ultimately look like - we can apply pressure here and
> there, but when choosing a candidate, a party is largely saying who will
> speak for them on a national level de facto.  The chairman moves from
> primary spokesman to a secondary role for a time (and, if he plays his
> cards right, becomes Chief of Staff).  I don't think our focus needs to be
> the 2020 race.
>
> I'd rather we focus on things we can control as a party.  For instance, as
> Michael Steele says, the function of the party is to bring all the
> campaigns together to achieve party-wide goals.  How can we do better at
> that?  I also think we need to, as a centralized body, help our campaigns
> to build better ground-games - we can do that by providing the right sorts
> of training, helping affiliates to recruit and select candidates, and then
> helping the various campaigns to work together and share resources, since
> most of our campaigns do not have the resources on their own to do these
> things at the size and scope necessary to win their elections.  It's not
> our job to get "inside" any of their campaigns, but rather to help them to
> work together from the outside.
>
> So, those are the sorts of questions I'd like to ask a consulting firm -
> how we can do better at those tasks.  I'd also like a strategic guide as
> far as what demographics to reach out to, where an outsider sees our growth
> potential, and so on.  I do think we need expert guidance on messaging as
> well - what mediums, how often, and broadly what should our strategic
> direction be in order to appeal to our targets.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Forwarded with permission; comments to follow under separate cover.
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: <travellingcircus at gmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Lnc-votes] [Lnc-business] Project
>> To: Caryn Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>, Joshua Katz <
>> joshua.katz at lp.org>, Trent Somes <Tsomes3 at gmail.com>
>>
>>
>> Oddly enough, the Republican study that Trent's proposal mentions came up
>> with recommendations that were the opposite of the approach Trump took -
>> reaching out more to Latinos, college educated women and young people - yet
>> Trump won.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:03 PM, <lnc-votes at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I will re-iterate what I said on Facebook.  There are certainly areas in
>>> which I think we need a cold hard look at things--however, a lot of this is
>>> dependent on the candidate. The LNC does not direct the candidates, and as
>>> such, I am not sure this is the best use of our money. Further, the
>>> "messaging" part concerns me, and without serious parameters, I am not
>>> interested in using member money for outsiders to tell Libertarians they
>>> need to be less Libertarian. As worded, I would not support.  If it focused
>>> more on sheer mechanics, and laid out that messaging needs to be within our
>>> Statement of Principles (as per our Bylaws - for which I see no mention or
>>> concern here), I would oppose. Strongly.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> A few thoughts:
>>>> 1.  My birthday is January 10.
>>>> 2.  I am generally in favor of this, but I agree with the comments in
>>>> the document about inherent bias and would favor option 1.  However, I'd
>>>> like to have an idea of the cost.  I'm having trouble understanding the
>>>> motion presented - it starts by talking about taking bids, but then states
>>>> the firm chosen will present their findings in December 2017.  If all we're
>>>> doing is taking bids, and more action will be needed to actually hire a
>>>> firm, how will the firm be chosen?  Will the committee choose them and
>>>> forward their choice to the LNC for an up/down vote, or simply present the
>>>> LNC with all the options?  In any case, I feel like I'm in the dark because
>>>> I don't have a sense of the neighborhood we'd expect for those bids.
>>>> 3.  I don't know what firms you have contacted, but here is a list of
>>>> the usual candidates for such an endeavor:
>>>> https://sipa.columbia.edu/system/files/Political%20Consultin
>>>> g%20Firms_0.pdf
>>>> There are, of course, others.
>>>> 4.  Thank you for thinking of this and putting together a package.
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Trent Somes <tsomes3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please take the time to read the attached document. I can't wait to
>>>>> see all of you again. If you have any questions, please text my cell phone
>>>>> or message me on social media, however I am on vacation right now and may
>>>>> be without service.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, Chairman Sarwark, can I please have 15-30 minutes to discuss
>>>>> this at the December meeting?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you all and Happy Thanksgiving,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Trent Somes, III*
>>>>> Region 5 Alternate, Libertarian National Committee
>>>>> Founder, Westmoreland County Libertarians
>>>>> <http://fb.com/wclibertarians>
>>>>> National Chair, Libertarian Youth Caucus <http://fb.com/LYCaucus>
>>>>> Facebook <http://fb.com/trentsomes/> Twitter
>>>>> <http://twitter.com/TrentSomes/> Instagram
>>>>> <http://instagram.com/trentsomes/> Address
>>>>> <https://goo.gl/maps/gWqJw21CJZs>
>>>>> Cell: (412) 496 - 8552 Home: (412) 646 - 1872
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "lncvotes" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to lncvotes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "lncvotes" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to lncvotes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-votes mailing list
>>> Lnc-votes at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-votes_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "lncvotes" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to lncvotes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161129/2d5a7310/attachment-0002.html>