Okay you convinced me. On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:12 AM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
I am 100% with that plan, that I am going to say I told you so on - not directed at you.
That does not address the concerns of my state chairs, nor do i think it requires rescinding ..., that is a functional adaptation that is actually within by laws as it is basically how we would do it in person.
That would merely require us to direct that type of procedure.
I would co sponsor a well written motion to that affect so fast heads would spin.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 14, 2020 9:25 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Mr Phillips, at this point I just want to do what we need to to let the state chairs ballot and give us their results.
I dint care right now if we have to sacrifice a goat to Zeus to make it happen
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:00 AM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
First, doing this in a separate thread because the threads on the original motions are already muddied and confused.
1. Mrs Harlos and Ms Mattson. I appreciate that you think rescind is the correct procedure. I am sorry that is not enough for myself or my states, we need to know WHY. Amending the motion previously adopted seems a much simpler procedure and less risky of losing the progress we have made. To support rescinding I will need a clear explanation of WHY. And not just why we should, but why we HAVE to. Those are 2 distinct things. There are many cases where just a little flexibility can greatly ease the journey and get us where we need to be. My state chairs are currently overwhelmingly in favor of not rescinding. They do not trust us to not screw it up worse, and honestly who can blame them. I do not, heck I agree with them.
2. I have said before I think the option with 10.14 or whatever the number is better, and was indeed one I floated long ago, as did others. If it is possible to push that one as an amendment I will consider it and take it to them.
3. As I understand it the latest issue is the current solution's inability to seat all 1046 delegates - in addition to the other issues that already existed. I find this issue compelling. Rather than scrap the whole motion tho, could we not make direction to solve that problem? I know the state chairs group has ideas. I understand that trust is low, mine is about gone, so I understand that trusting that would happen is questionable. So present a viable alternative.
In conclusion, sell me on it. The rescind is a very scary option, and I am not sold on it. I think the proposed change could help, and also allows us to use other means more easily in order to allow full participation in the potus/vp selection process, but I do not know that I can in good conscience support taking us all the way back to square one at this point.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
--
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
--
*In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *