[candidate-development] event! 5/17

[Merelice]

Greetings,

First, in deference to requests not to be bombarded by argumentative
emails, I have deleted the StateCom Discuss list from this response. I
have also deleted AdCom since this is not at present AdCom business.

Some simple facts:

Kat Swift accepted the analysis of a certain point of view about how
candidates were placed on the Mass. primary ballot and did not seek
out whether there was another point of view.

She did not extend to the Mass. Co-Chairs the courtesy of being in
touch with us to discuss her concerns. Instead, she simply went ahead
and filed a formal complaint against us and against the Secretary of
the Commonwealth (as did Jesse Johnson).

When we tried to follow up with her directly, she did not respond and
was not available.

While someone can disagree with the actions of certain party
"comrades," it seems inappropriate to apologize to anyone for those
actions when they were taken in a conscientious effort to be fair, to
try to anticipate on short notice what the reality would be by the
Feb. 5 Mass. primary, and to place six candidates instead of two on
the primary ballot. It is especially egregious to single out Nader as
having received preferential or undeserving treatment.

That said, I believe the GRP should give the four remaining candidates
equal access to whatever resources the Party might feel are
appropriate, as recommended by CDLC. And certainly any candidate's
supporters should be encouraged to organize on behalf of that
candidate. That is an integral part of preparing for the nominating
convention.

All the more reason to stop sandbagging the effort to assign
delegates. The sooner the delegates get assigned, the sooner they can
prepare for carrying out their responsibilities and the sooner the
candidates can communicate with them.

Merelice, Co-Chair