[statecom-discuss] Clarifying the StateCom meeting re presidential candidates and delegates

[danthbagelman at msn.com]

Merelice if go by that logic then you have to stop emails also for your putting canidates on the ballot. But this is a conversation and not decision. in a conversation we all have a voice!> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:07:24 -0500> From: merelice at gmail.com> To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org> CC: candidate-development at green-rainbow.org> Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Clarifying the StateCom meeting re presidential candidates and delegates> > On 2/4/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com <Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com> wrote:> > > Only the uncommitted delegates get decided in April - the others are all> > assigned well before that, in fact before the brief statecom meeting you and Dan> > will have in March.> > I appreciate the clarification.> > >> > So CDLC will have a delegate selection plan to follow that does not address> > candidates that are withdrawn or draft - Grace> > > Currently the delegate selection plan makes no distinction about the> type of candidate on our ballot. The simplest solution is to use 2004> as precedent when Nader, who wasn't on the Mass. ballot, received> write-in votes. The GRP honored the wishes of the voters and assigned> him a delegate.> > Our mantra to voters in other parties has been: "Vote for what you> want, not what you are told you can get." Let's apply that advice to> ourselves and respect those who "vote for what they want" and not try> to tell them "what they can get."> > We simply assign the number of delegates proportionately to the votes> received (unless there's a write-in candidate who belongs to another> political party), which is what our current plan provides. Many people> in the party see no reason to change that procedure.> > Merelice> > P.S. As noted in a previous email, you need to recuse yourself from> this discussion. It is a conflict of interest, given your active> support of one of the candidates.> > > > In a message dated 2/4/08 2:53:46 PM, merelice at gmail.com writes:> > > Mike,> ..... And given what you heard,> > > there was considerable guidance regarding how we treat the results of> > > the primary: Many spoke on behalf of giving all the candidates --> > > including the two who have withdrawn -- the delegates that they earn> > > in the primary.> > >> > > If people don't agree with that analysis, there is another StateCom> > > meeting before the July convention delegates get appointed.....> _______________________________________________> statecom-discuss mailing list> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
_________________________________________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008