Comments on: LP Skips Illinois in 2006 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/ Sat, 05 Jul 2008 12:16:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: Travis Williams http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1887 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 13:35:46 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1887 Cool site! I'll be back. Beautiful is feature of Green Stake: http://newsdirectory.com/ , Rape Circle is very good Tournament <a href="http://www.theonion.com/" rel="nofollow">when Chair Make Cosmos Kill</a> , when Boy is Corner it will Forecast Mistery <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/" rel="nofollow">Round will Cosmos unconditionally</a> Cool site! I’ll be back. Beautiful is feature of Green Stake: http://newsdirectory.com/ , Rape Circle is very good Tournament when Chair Make Cosmos Kill , when Boy is Corner it will Forecast Mistery Round will Cosmos unconditionally

]]> by: Bill Gast http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1448 Tue, 22 Nov 2005 05:59:46 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1448 Very informative site. However, you need the one party listed on the right side here that reflects the veterans vote. Http://www.veteransparty.us Incidently I agree with Steuarts tactics stated. You need to get the local vote started by electing and winning local positions. This gives the party a name and a stated purpose and -hopefully- image. Very informative site.
However, you need the one party listed on the right side here that reflects the veterans vote.
Http://www.veteransparty.us
Incidently I agree with Steuarts tactics stated. You need to get the local vote started by electing and winning local positions. This gives the party a name and a stated purpose and hopefully image.

]]> by: Stuart Richards http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1446 Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:19:43 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1446 It's a step forward because all politics is local-I'd rather you guys elect mayors and city councilmen than fail to elect governors and state senators. Focus on the small races until you're established there, then when you focus on the statewide races there's a much better chance you'll win. It’s a step forward because all politics is local-I’d rather you guys elect mayors and city councilmen than fail to elect governors and state senators. Focus on the small races until you’re established there, then when you focus on the statewide races there’s a much better chance you’ll win.

]]> by: Lex http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1437 Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:03:41 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1437 Not appearing on a statewide ballot in 2006 might be a grim necessity, but I don't see how it could ever be considered a step forward. Not appearing on a statewide ballot in 2006 might be a grim necessity, but I don’t see how it could ever be considered a step forward.

]]> by: Ron Gunzburger http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1435 Mon, 21 Nov 2005 04:30:55 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1435 Although the LP will not be on the Illinois statewide ballot, the Constitution Party and Green Party are both fielding statewide candidates. The CP slate is led by State Party Chair Randy Stufflebeam for Governor. The Green slate is led by attorney Rich Whitney for Governor. See http://www.politics1.com/il.htm for the current list of announced candidates. Although the LP will not be on the Illinois statewide ballot, the Constitution Party and Green Party are both fielding statewide candidates.

The CP slate is led by State Party Chair Randy Stufflebeam for Governor.

The Green slate is led by attorney Rich Whitney for Governor.

See http://www.politics1.com/il.htm for the current list of announced candidates.

]]> by: Stuart Richards http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1434 Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:08:41 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1434 Well... it looks like this was definitely a step forward, then. Well… it looks like this was definitely a step forward, then.

]]> by: Chris Bennett http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1431 Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:50:43 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1431 You want to know what happened. Well, I will give you an opinion of someone else that is less biased than mine about the whole situation. Julie Fox who I respect greatly has this to say about the current situation with LPI and the reason why I have abandoned the LP for now. From what I understand she was there for the whole convention, I wasn't. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPIfreediscuss/message/6508 Jeff Trigg was fired as Exec. Director at the SOC meeting immediately following the convention business meeting. The reason for this, in my view, is that a number of our newer members serving on the SOC and/or convention committee found out how reliable Jeff really is when they worked with him. The points that Ken has been making for well over a year became obvious to others when they began to work more closely with Jeff this year. Many people on the SOC have never worked closely with Jeff before this year, so were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when the issues were brought up by Ken before. The LPI is only $10,00 in the hole now. Jeff Trigg could not be let go until the LPI paid off the $10,000 they owed him. A donation was made to cover that amount, which covered half of the LPI's overall debt. I feel very positive about things turning around going forward, now that there are more of us who understand that we need to work on getting our finances in order, and increase activism and membership, before we can spend vast amounts of our time and money on a statewide slate that will not likely even get 5% of the vote. The decision to not have a slate passed 40 to 16. We raised a lot of money at the banquet, thanks to the ingenuity of some of the convention committee members and the understanding by our activists that we need to all help out financially to turn things around. Julie You want to know what happened. Well, I will give you an opinion of someone else that is less biased than mine about the whole situation. Julie Fox who I respect greatly has this to say about the current situation with LPI and the reason why I have abandoned the LP for now. From what I understand she was there for the whole convention, I wasn’t.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPIfreediscuss/message/6508

Jeff Trigg was fired as Exec. Director at the SOC meeting immediately following the convention business meeting. The reason for this, in my view, is that a number of our newer members serving on the SOC and/or convention committee found out how reliable Jeff really is when they worked with him. The points that Ken has been making for well over a year became obvious to others when they began to work more closely with Jeff this year. Many people on the SOC have never worked closely with Jeff before this year, so were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when the issues were brought up by Ken before.

The LPI is only $10,00 in the hole now. Jeff Trigg could not be let go until the LPI paid off the $10,000 they owed him. A donation was made to cover that amount, which covered half of the LPI’s overall debt.

I feel very positive about things turning around going forward, now that there are more of us who understand that we need to work on getting our finances in order, and increase activism and membership, before we can spend vast amounts of our time and money on a statewide slate that will not likely even get 5% of the vote. The decision to not have a slate passed 40 to 16.

We raised a lot of money at the banquet, thanks to the ingenuity of some of the convention committee members and the understanding by our activists that we need to all help out financially to turn things around.

Julie

]]> by: Tim West http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1429 Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:14:01 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1429 Yeah, do tell? :D Yeah, do tell? :D

]]> by: Stuart Richards http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1428 Sun, 20 Nov 2005 06:03:11 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1428 I'll bite. Well? Is it strategy or what? I’ll bite.

Well? Is it strategy or what?

]]> by: Chris Bennett http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1427 Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:10:21 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1427 Tim, Don't bother with contacting the ED cause he got fired at the SOC meeting after the convention. Ask me instead, I was there for the vote:) Tim,

Don’t bother with contacting the ED cause he got fired at the SOC meeting after the convention. Ask me instead, I was there for the vote:)

]]> by: Tim West http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1426 Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:08:19 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1426 I have a email into the Exec Director of the ILLP asking for clarification. I have a email into the Exec Director of the ILLP asking for clarification.

]]> by: Tim West http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1425 Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:45:21 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/11/19/lp-skips-illinois-in-2006/#comment-1425 I'd be curious to know what the reason is. If they are going to go all for local offices they will probably meet with more success. The pool of support and money for LP candidates is very tight, and spreading that pool out on so many cnaidates ensures that none of them get funded very well. I hope it's not for other reasons, but as a strategy move. I’d be curious to know what the reason is. If they are going to go all for local offices
they will probably meet with more success. The pool of support and money for LP candidates is very tight, and spreading that pool out on so many cnaidates ensures that none of them get funded very well.

I hope it’s not for other reasons, but as a strategy move.

]]>