[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2017-10: Donation to the Mark Wicks campaign

[Arvin Vohra]

I vote yes.

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am still on the fence for this vote.
>
> There are some very positive things.  Mr. Wicks got into the debates and
> did well.  He put more money into the race than just a filing fee.  He
> raised a little more money than what he put in.  He mentioned that he
> wished to use the money for online ads, and I asked if the ads were ready.
> I heard through the grapevine that a volunteer I know to be particularly
> talented with photography and video has completed some ads for him.
>
> One thing I am confused about is the plan for using the $5,000.  If it
> were a larger amount of money, and there were more time in which to use it,
> perhaps the budget could be rough.  But with so little time to use the
> funding, there ought to be a definite plan for every penny.  The first info
> we received from the candidate was that online ads were the plan.  Then I
> saw on Facebook an ad to raise money for purchasing voter data, which
> volunteers would use for phone calls and text messages...then someone (not
> the candidate) emailed us to say that the funds were for voter data, not
> online ads.
>
> I am still quite skeptical that an $11,600 budget can get traction at the
> last minute when the other parties are pouring so much money into the
> race.  Special elections are different creatures, often different
> demographics for the turnout, only one race being talked about in the
> media...but it also means the two major parties are not spread thin with
> races in other states and can put a lot of effort into this one race.
>
> The LNC has limited funds.  I also voted against the deficit budget that
> was adopted, and would like to not spend as much as was budgeted.
>
> We are not able to put money into every candidate's race, so that means we
> have to choose races where we think our funds will provide the best value.
> Those choices are usually made based on the circumstances, rather than
> directly based on the candidate.
>
> What I've not yet heard is what makes this race different from any other
> randomly chosen Libertarian Congressional candidate.  Every candidate hopes
> to win, but it hasn't happened yet at the Congressional level.  Why should
> we expect to see results here that are better than the typical performance
> of a Libertarian running for Congress against both a Democrat and a
> Republican?  What is different enough that warrants us to deficit spend?
>
> I think the money we invested into Mr. Miller's Texas ballot access race
> for railroad commissioner likely made a difference, as he retained by a
> slim margin, avoiding the need for a very expensive petition drive later.
> He had endorsements from several newspapers, but the result was still
> within the range of a fairly typical outcome for a partisan L-branded
> candidate.  So while Mr. Wicks has some good reviews from the debate, and a
> media outlet calling him the winner of the debate, I'm not convinced that's
> enough to substantially improve his numbers.  This is not a ballot access
> race, and general goodwill as a result doesn't make this campaign
> particularly unique.
>
> -Alicia
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We have an electronic mail ballot.
>>
>>
>> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by May 19, 2017 at 11:59:59pm
>> Pacific time.*
>> *Sponsor:*  Sarwark
>>
>> *Motion:* that the LNC contribute $5,000 to the Mark Wicks for Congress
>> campaign
>>
>> -Alicia
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>


-- 
Arvin Vohra

www.VoteVohra.com
VoteVohra at gmail.com
(301) 320-3634
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170515/53412d46/attachment-0002.html>