[Lnc-business] Request for co-sponsors for motion to support campaign of Joe Buchman

Tue Jul 11 23:30:45 EDT 2017

Regarding Dr. Buchman’s alleged “I can’t win” comment, Larry Sharpe has pointed out that despite the admittedly formidable odds against Larry winning the 2018 New York Governor’s race, it will be worth it not only to lay a foundation for the future but also, and just as important, to provide considerable credibility and word-of-mouth publicity impact to down-ticket races.

Thoughts?

~David

2018 Omaha Roads to Liberty Un-Convention

~David Pratt Demarest

LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)

LSLA Vice-Chair

LPNE State Central Committee, Secretary

From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Ken Moellman
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 9:33 PM
To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Request for co-sponsors for motion to support campaign of Joe Buchman

I cannot co-sponsor because I'm an alternate.  However, I have had several conversations and I want to chime back in and revise my statements from my initial email.

I do not know Dr. Buchman personally, and nothing I said before was meant to be personal.  As a former campaign manager, anything that sounds like "I can't win" makes me want to set the room on fire. I'm a bit sensitive on that matter.

Since that time, I have learned more information.  

The core issue is the use of the funds.  If the funds are being used to increase the ability of the campaign to do long-term outreach (supplies promoting the LP, building local parties, etc.), I could be convinced to support such a measure.  By contrast, if the funds are being used to purchase supplies like yard signs or other "temporary" campaign-related costs, I'd definitely be against it.  

I'm just an alternate, so my vote rarely counts.  But after obtaining more information and further thought on the matter, I felt it necessary to append my previous comments with these.

ken

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com> > wrote:

Joe is also a friend of mine, and yes, he is "okay" with it, meaning no ill feelings as he is a long-term and dedicated member of the Party who understands that this is business, he certainly urged me to ask, and has been asking me for updates-- so it would mean a great to him and his campaign.  This is the only Federal race going on right now - and he just scored a victory getting into a previously denied debate.  I have explained the realities of the situation with having no set standards yet and he understands -- but he certainly did ask me to pursue this.  And members have asked me about it.

As to funding ballot access, though I respect my predecessor Norm immensely - he and I are of different minds when it comes to ballot access funding - he would routinely vote no.  I have always voted yes.  There are many reasons for that but one issue that arises is that Region 1 gets short shrift in that - or it can **appear** so.  I am fully on board with the idea that nationwide ballot access benefits everyone, but it is certainly true that these funds do not go to Region 1 - with the highest numerical amounts of affiliates (9 states).  Utah is Region 1 and helping with a Region 1 campaign helps to balance this out and thus far, I have had the full support of my regional chairs when supporting ballot access funding because I press the case that region 1 is getting benefits from pushing national memberships and in their national membership.  

I also urge other members to give a contribution.  I will be doing so when I see how this month's finances go.

I thank David and Whitney for co-sponsoring.  I ask for one more.

--Caryn Ann

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:13 PM, William Redpath <wredpath2 at gmail.com <mailto:wredpath2 at gmail.com> > wrote:

Joe Buchman is a multi-decade friend of mine.  I thank him very much for running--he jumped in at the last minute when another candidate backed out--and wish him the best in his Campaign.  I have personally contributed $201 to Joe Buchman's Campaign.  I urge other members of the LNC to do so, as well.  However, I am opposed to the LNC contributing to his Campaign.  I have discussed this with Joe, and he is OK with no LNC funding of his Campaign.  I wish we did, but the LNC currently does not have the resources to be contributing to many, if any, candidates, particularly when we have other needs, including ballot access in Tennessee and Alabama.  And, we have Ohio to finish, and that is a big job.

I ask people not to co-sponsor this motion and, should it become a motion, to vote "No."

Bill Redpath

--------------------------------------------

On Tue, 7/11/17, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=carynannharlos@gmail.com> > wrote:

Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Request for co-sponsors for motion to support campaign of Joe Buchman

To: "Libertarian National Committee list" <lnc-business at hq.lp.org <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=lnc-business@hq.lp.org> >

Cc: "Joseph Buchman" <drbuchman at gmail.com <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=drbuchman@gmail.com> >

Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2017, 1:31 PM

Joe got in

the debates - this is getting momentum.  I am once again

asking for the needed co-sponsors.

-Caryn Ann

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:08 PM, David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com <mailto:dprattdemarest at gmail.com> > wrote:

I will co-sponsor.

On Jul 11, 2017 12:32 PM, "Caryn Ann Harlos" <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com> > wrote:

Joe got in the debates - this is getting momentum.  I am once again asking for the needed co-sponsors.

-Caryn Ann

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com <mailto:danielehayes at icloud.com> > wrote:

Nick,

I am sure you are already on it but would this warrant a letter from Oliver?  It sounds like it may.  Only including two people from the old establishment parties in the debate, for the sake of time as the criteria I have seen for the inclusion, doesn't seem unbiased to me.  AFP is a non-profit as I recall. That might put AFP in an even more precarious position than the television station in Montana.

As this is regarding potential legal action, I don't expect much of a response here on this public list.  I am certain the letters, correspondence, filings and other actions, if appropriate, will be put into action by those with the letters J.D. behind their name.

Daniel Hayes

LNC At Large Member

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 11, 2017, at 1:31 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com> > wrote:

Dr. Buchman sent this to me this morning to provide an answer to Ken's inquiry and to give information and a request about the debates he has been excluded from.  It did not make it to my inbox however and he re-sent to me after speaking on the phone this evening and since that time he has been officially denied debate access (as per the response I posted in another LNC business thread).  But please take this information into consideration in this request.

I know that we want to develop a candidate assistance procedure.  And I understand that is on the agenda for August. But I ask please do not let that get in the way of assisting a candidate now.  It is not the fault of the candidates that we don't yet have such a procedure and this is in the only Federal race now - great opportunity to get attention for a committed Libertarian candidate.  Please consider this request..... and in member relations purpose, it does not help member confidence when we are not assisting when we can in a race that has the sole stage right now.  

>>>Why won't we assist with the campaign of this candidate in the Federal race?

>>>Because we don't have criteria for assistance.

>>>Why don't you have criteria?

>>>Because we haven't done it yet.

>>>So candidates suffer from LNC lack of establishment of protocol?  

The Mark Wicks donation invigorated that race and our members.  This could do likewise.  Please co-sponsor my request.

The below is from Dr. Buchman:

===========

I am asking for help from those who have connections with Americans for Prosperity in my request to be included in their Third District candidate debates.  Please see the email I sent to them copied below and help if you can. 

As I said in the KSL interview, the first step toward winning is getting into these debates.  I see getting into the debates as where the focus should be, just as a mountain climber focuses on the next step, or Governor Johnson focuses on the next curve in his mountain road.  To focus on "winning the race" rather than those immediate intermediate goals is not a winning strategy; it's delusional.   I did not say, and have never said,  "I am not going to win."  What I said was: "I am not running to win . . . primarily I am running, first, to get into the debates."   I also said: "The chances of a Libertarian winning the Third District in Utah are not impossible; I’m swinging; I’m going to go for it; I’m giving it everything I have. "  

I sure wish saying that had made every KSL and LNC listener "happy."

I'll leave it to others to discern if my interview with Doug Wright (has invited me back again) is fairly characterized as a "concession speech." 

If that has left you off-put for listening to the entire interview, I'd ask you  read the following for the full context and  reconsider:

WRIGHT: This gentleman has some KSL connections that we’ll talk about some other time, but I want to really get into the motivation, what caused you to want to get into this race; you’ve got a PhD, you’re running as a Libertarian, so let’s just set the stage. Give us a little background on you and why you are in this race.

BUCHMAN: You know Doug, when I walked into your waiting room, I see there in the lobby, huge letters on the wall, “A Light of Truth in the World.” The truth that I run on is the foundation of Libertarian politics which is the fundamental principle in our philosophy that drives our politics, our ethics, our morality and those other fields of philosophy of which politics is one, is pretty simple, that is that no human being should have the right to initiate force, violence against others, to initiate force. And then the second core principle is that you either own your physical body, it’s yours to do with as you see fit, or you’re part slave; you’re owned by someone else. So we take the principles of non-initiation of aggression and self-ownership and we apply them to politics.

Like you said, I am a college professor, that’s where I am coming from.  I am not running to win, the chances of a Libertarian winning the Third District in Utah are not impossible; I’m swinging; I’m going to go for it; I’m giving it everything I have . . .

WRIGHT: right . . .

BUCHMAN: . . . if I can get Rosie O’ Donnell to retweet something, who knows . . .

WRIGHT: It worked for Dr. Allen.

BUCHMAN: . . . or Drew Carey, or Penn & Teller or some other Libertarians who we are reaching out to, who knows? Anything is possible; but primarily I am running, first of all, to get into the debates. We need a Libertarian voice in the debates. 

My email to Americans for Prosperity:

From: Joseph Buchman <drbuchman at gmail.com <mailto:drbuchman at gmail.com> >
Date: Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 3:45 PM
Subject: Third District Candidate debate
To: infout at afphq.org <mailto:infout at afphq.org> 

I am writing as the Libertarian Party of Utah's candidate for the Third District to request inclusion in the debates sponsored by Americans For Prosperity.

See, for example, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154532862572120 <https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154532862572120&set=gm.1744266952269118&type=3&theater> &set=gm.1744266952269118&type=3&theater 

I am on the ballot as a General Election candidate for this office, see:

 <https://elections.utah.gov/election-resources/2017-candidate-filings> https://elections.utah.gov/election-resources/2017-candidate-filings

In the absence of an invitation to participate in your debates, may I inquire of the standards/process for your selection of candidates?

Thanks for your attention to this request,

Joe

These debates were announced on Friday; the first debate is to be held tomorrow (Tuesday evening).  I'll be there either in the audience or on the stage. See:

http://www.sltrib.com/news/5485360-155/two-debates-set-for-three-republican

And while they are now being repurposed as for the "Republican primary candidates only" please note the portion of the article which indicates the Democrat was invited.

"Democrat Kathie Allen — who's raised nearly $700,000 in donations — did not respond to an invitation to join the event, Everton said."

Evelyn Everton is the Utah State Director for Americans for Prosperity.  

Again any help you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

I hope you'll listen to the entire KSL interview and form your own opinion of it.  I'm sure I could have done better and continue to seek your constructive feedback as well as help in having Americans for Prosperity include the Libertarian in their debates.

Thanks again for your consideration,

Joe

_______________________
Joseph G. Buchman, PhD

584 Hillside Circle

Alpine UT 84004

+++++++++++

---------Caryn Ann

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com> > wrote:

Very good points Starchild and both views are represented in our membership.

I certainly hope we don't divisively "take sides" on that.

-Caryn Ann 

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:07 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net <mailto:sfdreamer at earthlink.net> > wrote:

Ken,

You're certainly not the first Libertarian to express a disappointed emotional reaction to a candidate's realistic appraisal of his or her chances, but to you and any other Libertarian who has felt this way, I say take heart! One can lose in conventional terms and still win in libertarian terms. A conventional win means the warm body you support occupying the sought-after office. A libertarian win, however, means advancing the cause of freedom! Such wins can happen in any number of ways – building momentum for a future run, exposing more people to libertarian ideas, building the party, etc. Of course the cause of freedom is usually more likely to be advanced by a Libertarian occupying the sought-after office than by not occupying it – but it isn't the be-all, end-all it's too often made out to be. In some ways, the real fight begins after an election is won. If an elected Libertarian isn't mentally prepared to stick to his or her libertarian principles and positions, or doesn't have solidly libertarian principles or positions to begin with, the real, post-election fight for what s/he will do in office is as good as lost. Amid the statist culture and pressures in which s/he will be immersed, such an elected Libertarian will have little chance of surviving with an agenda to advance the cause of freedom intact.

Predicting an election loss also isn't the same thing as conceding. When a candidate concedes a race, s/he is saying "the campaign is over, my opponent won". Clearly Joe Buchman is saying no such thing! From appearances, he is running and will continue to run a vigorous campaign and seek as much exposure for our ideas and as many votes as possible. He is running to win in libertarian terms. But is it wise to predict a loss at the ballot box? While miracles occasionally do happen and I've suggested candidates leave the perceptions door open by not entirely ruling out the possibility of getting elected, I would much rather see a Libertarian fighting a long-shot campaign – and this is obviously a long-shot campaign; no Libertarian has come close to being elected to Congress – say flat-out that s/he won't win, than to flat-out say that s/he will. Any candidate facing those kind of odds who predicts electoral victory is either deceiving him/herself, or attempting to deceive others. The former shows a poor grasp of reality, while the latter shows a lack of integrity. Neither reflects well on the candidate! Joe, by contrast, showed his good character by giving an honest and realistic assessment of his chances. For every person out there who thinks, 'I want to vote for someone who tells me s/he's going to win', I believe there's another person out there thinking, 'I want to vote for someone who has integrity and tells the truth'. To which type of voter mentality should we, as the Party of Principle, be trying to appeal?

Love & Liberty,

                                     ((( starchild )))

At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee

                          RealReform at earthlink.net <mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net> 

                                  (415) 625-FREE

                                   @StarchildSF

On Jul 10, 2017, at 12:00 AM, Ken Moellman wrote:

I found out about this campaign yesterday (now, 2 days ago) and the referenced KSL interview almost immediately starts with the candidate saying "I'm not going to win."  It made me sad. More importantly, I can't agree to give money to someone who has already conceded the race.  I mean, what is the money going to be used for?  Losing better?

By contrast, from what I can see, candidates like Laura Ebke and at least one of the recent converts in NH are gearing up re-election campaigns with the intent to win. They certainly haven't publicly conceded, anyway.  There are lots of candidates throughout the country gearing up for 2018 races. 4 L converts and many other candidates looking to run winnable races. 

If this body decides to support candidates, I'd really rather see this body support candidates that are running to win.

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com> > wrote:

Hello everyone, I received the below request from Dr. Joe Buchman (Utah) and have been speaking with him about this for the past few weeks.  I would like us to consider assisting him to our maximum allowed of 5K.

========

To the members of the LNC:

The resignation of Representative Chaffetz nine days ago from the Third District of Utah has created a Special Election to be held 7 November 2017.

Joe Buchman is the Libertarian Candidate for that seat and following a special election convention by the Libertarian Party of Utah is on the ballot for November 7th.   There is a Democratic opponent.  Three Republicans will face each other in a primary next month.  

See: https://elections.utah.gov/election-resources/2017-candidate-filings

This is, we believe, the only remaining contest for federal office in 2017 with a Libertarian candidate.

To date Dr. Buchman has invested $1,000.00 of his personal funds in the campaign and has raised approximately $250.00 from other donors, with promises for about $500 in process.

Joe has just been scheduled as the sole guest for the first hour of Coast to Coast AM, a national networked late-night radio talk show with an estimated 2.5 million listeners, for Saturday evening, July 29th, 10:05PM to 11:00PM Pacific time.  Past show hosts Art Bell and Rollye James were self-identified Libertarians, and past guests have included Judge Jim Gray, Michael Badnarik, Aaron Russo, Harry Browne, Andre Marrou and Dr. Buchman himself (in 2008, when he last ran for the US Congress).

See: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/search/?query=libertarian

Joe will be discussing his campaign for the US Congress, his platform as an expression of the NAP and Self-Ownership paradigms, will be directing listeners to his website and will be requesting donations.  The Coast to Coast website will also provide a link to his campaign site - www.GotoL.vote <http://www.GotoL.vote> 

This is a request for national party funding for this singularly important Special Election campaign.  

The resignation of Representative Chaffetz has already generated significant national media attention, and this race is likely to continue to generate national media coverage as the replacement of Congressman Chaffetz will reflect, to some degree, a measure of voter confidence in the Trump administration.

The Libertarian Party nationally will benefit from this election, the last of 2017 to include a Libertarian candidate for federal office.

If a funding agreement can be reached prior to the show, Dr. Buchman would then appeal to Coast to Coast listeners with a promise that any donations received during the show will be matched dollar-for-dollar.  The show will be replayed and will also be available as a download from the network website.

Joe has been interviewed by three local papers (the Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News and City Weekly) and by KSL Radio's Doug Wright.  

That 9 minute radio interview can be found at:

https://www.ksl.com/?nid=1388 <https://www.ksl.com/?nid=1388&a=11898> &a=11898

Bottom line: Joe is experienced with media interviews, had a prior career in radio (including working with Bill Redpath at WTTS radio in the 1970s), is passionate about both Libertarian political pragmatism and philosophy, and is currently scheduled for one of the most visible media appearances by any Libertarian Candidate this month (and perhaps for the remainder of this year).

This special election creates something of a special case for funding; an amount equivalent to that provided to the recent candidate in Montana would seem equitable.

With gratitude for your consideration of this request,

Joe

PS If you do choose to listen to the KSL interview and/or to review the website and links to the print interviews there; ALL feedback, suggestions for improvement are also welcomed.

-- 

In Liberty,

Caryn Ann Harlos