[Lnc-business] Request for assistance from Mark Wicks
Starchild
sfdreamer at earthlink.net
Wed May 10 12:04:50 EDT 2017
Sam,
The objections you raise seem well-founded to me, and I share your concerns. Well okay, maybe not about Mark Wicks only just having joined the national party; I presume he is a member of the Montana LP and has signed the Non-Aggression pledge? If not, and if the importance attached to his becoming a national LP member is about securing his signature on the pledge, then I concur in deeming it an important, but otherwise I don't think it matters much. Whether he's given the national party $25 seems pretty inconsequential when we're thinking of giving him $5000. What matters are his beliefs, character, positions on the issues, and what he's doing to advance the cause of freedom. Which organization(s) he happens to belong to, not as much.
Nevertheless, I must also vote no on this motion. I might have voted yes for a significantly smaller donation, in consideration of the reasons noted by David Demarest, Caryn Ann Harlos, and Nick Sarwark and the fact that I hate to see Libertarians fighting the good fight come to us for help and go away empty-handed, but it seems unfair and imprudent to give one Libertarian candidate $5000 in a case like this when so many Libertarians running for office get nothing from us, many of them arguably with stronger libertarian positions on the issues and/or better chances of winning their elections or otherwise advancing the cause.
Mark Wicks sounds on the whole like a decent Libertarian candidate with the potential to appeal to Montanans, even if this radical can't get very enthused about his stating a desire to "keep Social Security stable" rather than talking about trying to phase out the Ponzi scheme, or his apparent endorsement of government continuing to run Montana's national parks with money stolen from the taxpayers instead of favoring better protection of these natural gems by voluntary sector groups (see http://wicksforfreedom.com/issues/ ). Certainly I'm delighted to hear that he got to debate the cartel candidates in his race and performed well.
My opposition to this and many other funding requests we've received continues to be mainly about the fact that we need a better approach to deciding which candidates and campaigns to fund, and to what tune. The current process (or lack thereof) is far too ad hoc, and too susceptible to familiarity bias and other subjective factors for my liking. I've been thinking about what a better approach might look like, and hope to send some proposed language soon. Others' input of course welcome.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
(415) 625-FREE
@StarchildSF
On May 10, 2017, at 5:06 AM, Sam Goldstein wrote:
> 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
>
> Home: 402-493-0873
>
>
>
> 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
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170510/2659815b/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list