[Lnc-business] Request for assistance from Mark Wicks

Wed May 10 08:06:39 EDT 2017

Putting aside obscure grammar debates and returning to the main discussion,
I will vote against this motion
due to my prior stated objections.  Plus, it looks like this was an
extremely late discussion, the candidate was
not even a member of the national party until he was asked to join for us
to consider his request and I don't
think it will have any impact on this race.

Sam

Sam Goldstein
Libertarian National Committee
Member at Large
8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
Indianapolis IN 46260
317-850-0726 Phone
317-582-1773 Fax

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sure, let's go with that.  This is my write-on week, so I am literally
> spending hours each day doing things like making sure commas and periods
> are italicized/not italicized, as appropriate.  Because no one would be
> able to follow a law review article if a comma were incorrectly italicized,
> or if a date were in parenthesis instead of commas, or vice-versa - they'd
> have no idea what's going on!  Let's not even begin on the joys of the em
> dash and en dash.  Yet here I am missing the difference between its and
> it's.  Sigh.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Joshua,
>>
>> Just say it was an incomplete edit.  You were gonna write "RONR provides
>> no guidance because it's a terrible idea that RONR advises against doing at
>> all," but then you edited the sentence so that the contraction no longer
>> belonged, and you merely forgot to finish the edit.  :-)
>>
>> -Alicia
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 8:06 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My god, what have I done?  <Its>
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> RONR provides no guidance because it's general advice is that, if you
>>>> decide to use email voting, you are on your own.  Our own rules, though,
>>>> are clear.  A vote closes after 10 days OR when all LNC members, not
>>>> including alternates, have cast a vote.  If we want to expedite the
>>>> process, everyone needs to vote quickly.  It would be improper to take
>>>> action when even a majority of the full LNC has cast "yes" votes because
>>>> votes may be changed until the vote closes (and for the more obvious but
>>>> less practical reason that, until it closes, nothing has been decided).
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:54 PM, David Demarest <
>>>> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> *Nick*, *Alicia*:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To Tim’s point, the election is a mere 16 days away. If we start the
>>>>> email ballot tonight, the full 10-day email ballot process would leave only
>>>>> 6 days left before the election. Would that be sufficient for Mr. Wickes to
>>>>> take full advantage of our $5,000? Or should we consider either
>>>>> Johnny/Jill-on-the-spot with all our votes or taking action immediately
>>>>> after the required number of Yes votes has been received?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Joshua, *Aaron*: What guidance does RONR provide on the latter
>>>>> question?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming all 17 votes would be cast, what would be the number of Yes
>>>>> votes required to pass this motion?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I will be voting Yes on this motion as soon as it is opened for voting.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ~David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Dec 28-Jan 1 Omaha Roads to Liberty Un-Convention*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>>>>
>>>>> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>>>>>
>>>>> Secretary, LPNE State Central Committee
>>>>>
>>>>> Cell:      402-981-6469 <%28402%29%20981-6469>
>>>>>
>>>>> Home: 402-493-0873 <%28402%29%20493-0873>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>>> Behalf Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 09, 2017 9:42 PM
>>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Request for assistance from Mark Wicks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nick would that be the language?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 8:19 PM Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I will sponsor a motion for the LNC to contribute $5,000 to the Mark
>>>>> Wicks for Congress campaign.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our counsel and many others worked very hard to make sure Mr. Wicks
>>>>> could be in the televised debate (that he did very well in), I think
>>>>> it would be good to follow through and this is a very reasonable
>>>>> request after the candidate (a) raised a similar amount of money and
>>>>> (b) put in a similar amount of money on his own.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Nick
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > I will get the appropriate links and commentary about the debate
>>>>> from Mr.
>>>>> > Wicks.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -Caryn Ann
>>>>> >
>>>>> > So we have myself and Joshua willing to co-sponsor a motion for
>>>>> $5,000.  We
>>>>> > would need two more.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Joshua Katz <
>>>>> planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I take that to mean that there is no ballot access retention based
>>>>> on this
>>>>> >> race.  It might be true that better voter numbers than we have ever
>>>>> seen
>>>>> >> before makes a difference for us, perhaps even a national-scale
>>>>> difference
>>>>> >> (which is what it takes, short of ballot access, in my eyes, to
>>>>> invest
>>>>> >> national money).  What I'm less sure of, though, is that investing
>>>>> money
>>>>> >> into this campaign will achieve that.  Is the debate video available
>>>>> >> somewhere, or commentary saying he won the debate?  That makes a
>>>>> difference,
>>>>> >> and I can certainly see the value of $5,000 to amplify that if it is
>>>>> >> credible and exists.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I also note that, while it's a 3-way race, the Democrat doesn't
>>>>> strike me
>>>>> >> as particularly serious, which could be an opportunity.  I don't
>>>>> think
>>>>> >> either of those candidates has been able to demonstrate that they
>>>>> care, and
>>>>> >> if Wicks can do that, if he had debate moments like Bill Clinton's
>>>>> answer on
>>>>> >> the national debt in that town hall debate, and we can make an ad
>>>>> with a 5
>>>>> >> second clip like that, I'm sold.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I'm less excited about the fact that this is an at-large
>>>>> Congressional
>>>>> >> seat.  Yes, online ads have the greatest reach, but don't across to
>>>>> most as
>>>>> >> being as credible, and there's no other real way for him, with his
>>>>> budget,
>>>>> >> to reach across the state.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> He is right that $5,000 is a small amount to invest.  I don't like
>>>>> >> investing small amounts.  As I argued at the last meeting about the
>>>>> >> consultants, people tell you what they are worth.  Someone pricing
>>>>> >> themselves well below market is telling you something.  Wicks is
>>>>> not pricing
>>>>> >> himself low, but I'm not convinced that $5,000 can do anything for
>>>>> him.  It
>>>>> >> can get him an online ad, but I'm not sure it can get enough
>>>>> impressions to
>>>>> >> get people talking.  So let me ask against - what is the maximum we
>>>>> can
>>>>> >> give?  Also, if we gave more than $5,000, does he have the campaign
>>>>> >> infrastructure to use it effectively?  I'm more interested in
>>>>> spending money
>>>>> >> where it can do good than in minimizing the money spent in a given
>>>>> place.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I like that the ask is for less than he's raised.  I'm less
>>>>> thrilled that,
>>>>> >> with the full ask, he'd have $11,600 for a statewide Congressional
>>>>> race.
>>>>> >> I'm not concerned about that because it's not enough to win - I'm
>>>>> concerned
>>>>> >> about that because I don't know that it's enough to be heard
>>>>> outside of a
>>>>> >> small echo chamber.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> He has a very nice website.  It looks good, it draws you in, it's
>>>>> fairly
>>>>> >> interactive, and it focuses on applying our ideas in ways that
>>>>> matter to
>>>>> >> Montanans.  On the other hand, with $6k raised, he didn't use a
>>>>> professional
>>>>> >> photographer, I think, for his photos.  He looks much better in his
>>>>> tv shots
>>>>> >> than in his own pictures.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Bernie Sanders is campaigning for the Democrat (like I said, not
>>>>> serious)
>>>>> >> while Trump and Pence are both campaigning for the Republican.  The
>>>>> >> Republicans, between party and PACs, are spending $1,600,000.
>>>>> Democrats are
>>>>> >> spending somewhere in the 6 digits.  I don't think $11,600 is
>>>>> enough to have
>>>>> >> a voice, but $20,000 might be, if used correctly.  This is a unique
>>>>> >> opportunity and a strong race.  We've already put national
>>>>> firepower into
>>>>> >> getting him into the debate.  I would like to see us give more, and
>>>>> >> accompany it with a national staffer acting as campaign adviser to
>>>>> improve a
>>>>> >> few of the nuts and bolts and making sure the amplification works
>>>>> out well.
>>>>> >> In the meantime, I will cosponsor a motion to give $5,000.  I will
>>>>> not
>>>>> >> cosponsor a motion to give $2,500.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On the bigger picture: I agree that we need a better structure than
>>>>> having
>>>>> >> this board make such decisions on the basis of limited information,
>>>>> without
>>>>> >> much time to research.  I had wanted to come up with such a
>>>>> structure, but
>>>>> >> life has gotten in the way, both for me and for the LNC.  I also
>>>>> acknowledge
>>>>> >> that our budget is in a deficit - but our budget does include a
>>>>> line for
>>>>> >> candidates and campaigns, and only half of that line has been
>>>>> allocated, so
>>>>> >> we've already put aside money for this (in a sense).  Furthermore,
>>>>> our cash
>>>>> >> position is entirely the result of our own decisions.  I don't
>>>>> think we can
>>>>> >> make ourselves cash-poor, write a budget that shows a deficit
>>>>> (which I
>>>>> >> didn't vote for, for that reason among others), and then use that
>>>>> as a
>>>>> >> reason that we cannot help our candidates who can, in fact, make a
>>>>> >> difference and help grow this party - growth that will, hopefully,
>>>>> close
>>>>> >> that gap next year.  Last year, we took in quite a bit more than we
>>>>> budgeted
>>>>> >> for - in large part based on the attention our national ticket was
>>>>> getting,
>>>>> >> and in large part because, I think, people wanted us to support key
>>>>> races.
>>>>> >> Is this a key race?  I think it is, given the timing, the lack of a
>>>>> serious
>>>>> >> Democrat, the spending imbalance between the Rs and Ds, and so on,
>>>>> but
>>>>> >> that's for each of us to decide.  Our candidate has also not just
>>>>> gotten
>>>>> >> into a debate, but shown that he knows what he's doing once there,
>>>>> and in
>>>>> >> the process gotten himself useful soundbites for an ad campaign (I'm
>>>>> >> assuming affirmative answers to my questions above).
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> >> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Mark Wicks provided these responses and apologized that he is not
>>>>> as
>>>>> >>> eloquent as possible as he was calling from the campaign trail:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> "I think this is being looked at the wrong way. Both parties are
>>>>> looking
>>>>> >>> for a win to prove their agenda is supported by the American
>>>>> people. We need
>>>>> >>> to show that both parties are being rejected. A win cements that
>>>>> but we also
>>>>> >>> win with better voter numbers than we have ever seen before. It
>>>>> gives
>>>>> >>> legitimacy, and that helps all of us. It sets me up for 2018 and
>>>>> other
>>>>> >>> candidates as well. We can't raise money without some measure of
>>>>> success.
>>>>> >>> $5000 is a small investment into a campaign that will pay
>>>>> dividends for all
>>>>> >>> candidates. We won a battle getting into the debate, I won the
>>>>> debate, now
>>>>> >>> we are positioning pieces for the next war and trying to inflict
>>>>> as much
>>>>> >>> damage as possible in this one."
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:08 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> >>> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Alicia, yes, and running strong campaigns.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:36 AM, Alicia Mattson <
>>>>> agmattson at gmail.com>
>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Also, is this looking to be a 3-way race with both the Democrats
>>>>> and
>>>>> >>>>> Republicans running candidates?
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> -Alicia
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> >>>>> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> On behalf of Montana candidate Mark Wicks running for the
>>>>> vacated seat
>>>>> >>>>>> by the appointment of Zinke, he is requesting the LNC assist
>>>>> his campaign
>>>>> >>>>>> financially.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> I had let him know specific information we would need, and
>>>>> would like
>>>>> >>>>>> to share that information:
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> I know you asked for a budget for how I will spend the money
>>>>> and with
>>>>> >>>>>> time constraints and getting the word out online media seems to
>>>>> be the way
>>>>> >>>>>> to go. We have ads that are being readied and ready to go
>>>>> anytime. Flathead
>>>>> >>>>>> county is having a Liberty Bash combined with a send the work
>>>>> truck event.
>>>>> >>>>>> We can get a live remote and good online adds for $2500. That
>>>>> will cover the
>>>>> >>>>>> valley really well. The east side of the state is taken care of
>>>>> and all the
>>>>> >>>>>> big towns are covered except Great Falls. I can use as much as
>>>>> the LP can
>>>>> >>>>>> send, but I think $5000 would make a good impact. We have
>>>>> received $3600,
>>>>> >>>>>> plus I have put in about $3000 total. I can't give any measure
>>>>> of impact.
>>>>> >>>>>> People are really searching for a third choice so even minimal
>>>>> presentation
>>>>> >>>>>> will go a long ways.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> If any LNC member is interested in co-sponsoring a motion to
>>>>> assist in
>>>>> >>>>>> any amount please let me know so we can craft.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> --
>>>>> >>>>>> 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
>>>>> >>>>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>>> >>>>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>>>> >>>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>> >>>>>> We defend your rights
>>>>> >>>>>> And oppose the use of force
>>>>> >>>>>> Taxation is theft
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >>>>>> 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
>>>>> >>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>>> >>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>>>> >>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>> >>>> We defend your rights
>>>>> >>>> And oppose the use of force
>>>>> >>>> Taxation is theft
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> --
>>>>> >>> 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
>>>>> >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>>> >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>>>> >>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>> >>> We defend your rights
>>>>> >>> And oppose the use of force
>>>>> >>> Taxation is theft
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >>> 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
>>>>> > Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>>> > Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>>>> > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>> >
>>>>> > A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>> > We defend your rights
>>>>> > And oppose the use of force
>>>>> > Taxation is theft
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > 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>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>>
>>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>>>
>>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170510/d2796553/attachment-0002.html>