<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tr><td valign="top"><p>thoughts on tabling and registration from GROW</p>
</td></tr></table> <div id="_origMsg_">
<div>
<br />
<div>
<div style="font-size:0.9em">
<hr size="1">
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">From:</span>
</b>
Jared Laiti <jared.laiti@gmail.com>; <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span>
</b>
<gpca-grow@cagreens.org>; <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span>
</b>
[gpca-grow] Registration <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span>
</b>
Wed, Jul 24, 2013 1:47:37 AM <br>
</div>
<br>
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Marnie,<BR><BR>I think it depends a lot on the location. You want a busy spot with a<BR>lot of people coming by, and you also want a location that attracts<BR>likely Green-minded folks too if possible. For example at the March<BR>Against Monsanto, we were able to get over 20 registrations, most of<BR>them in under 2 hours. Earth Day would be another good example. Next<BR>up are probably locations like the farmer's market or natural foods<BR>store.. Tim Smith used to always make a point of going to what he<BR>called 'mainstream' grocery stores, ie Safeway, where he also did very<BR>well. The key is to have a steady stream of people.<BR><BR>But tabling technique also matters. You are there to engage potential<BR>registrants. When you get the chance to do that, take it, that's what<BR>you're out there for. That means pitching registration to people as<BR>they make contact with the table or eye contact
with you. You aren't<BR>there to debate, pitch to the people walking by if someone is trying<BR>to have an unproductive (ie not going to lead to a registration<BR>withing 5 or so minutes) debate with you..<BR><BR>Jared<BR><BR>> From: Marnie Glickman <<a ymailto="mailto:marnie.glickman@gmail.com" href="javascript:return">marnie.glickman@gmail.com</a>><BR>> To: GPCA Grasswork Organizing Working Group <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> Subject: Re: [gpca-grow] Only reliable way to preserve ballot<BR>> status---how Greens achieved it in the first place (!)--is through<BR>> voter registration drives<BR><BR>> How many voters we register per hour is an issue we should discuss and<BR>> track.<BR>><BR>> In Marin, we can register 4-5 Greens per hour.<BR>><BR>> The best Greens registration rates are
10 Greens per hour.<BR>><BR>> What is your rate? How can we reach 10 per hour?<BR>><BR>> Marnie Glickman<BR>><BR>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM, <<a ymailto="mailto:barry@hermansons.com" href="javascript:return">barry@hermansons.com</a>> wrote:<BR>><BR>> > I'm not saying you shouldn't continue the work you are doing to register<BR>> > new voters. Thank you for the work you are doing.<BR>> ><BR>> > I'm questioning the value of the time I spend registering voters. I<BR>> > also<BR>> > know that we don't have enough volunteers to help register new voters.<BR>> > Fortunately, we may have just enough to keep us on the ballot for 4 more<BR>> > years.<BR>> ><BR>> > I hope to identify a few new volunteers this year.<BR>> ><BR>> > Barry<BR>> ><BR>> > -------- Original Message --------<BR>> > Subject: Re: [gpca-grow] Only
reliable way to preserve ballot<BR>> > status---how Greens achieved it in the first place (!)--is through voter<BR>> > registration drives<BR>> > From: Alex Shantz <<a ymailto="mailto:alexshantz@gmail.com" href="javascript:return">alexshantz@gmail.com</a>><BR>> > Date: Mon, July 22, 2013 5:10 pm<BR>> > To: GPCA Grasswork Organizing Working Group <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> ><BR>> > Barry,<BR>> > We are working on registering new greens in order to stay on the ballot.<BR>> > If our registration numbers don't equal 1% of the total votes cast<BR>> > during<BR>> > the gubernatorial election, we may cease to exist on the ballot. This is<BR>> > a<BR>> > matter of survival. If we aren't on the ballot then how do you expect us<BR>> > to<BR>> > build ourselves to a place where we do have
political strength?<BR>> > ~Alex~<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:58 PM, <<a ymailto="mailto:barry@hermansons.com" href="javascript:return">barry@hermansons.com</a>> wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> >> If Greens don't vote, why are we working to register new Greens? 70%<BR>> >> or<BR>> >> more of all of the effort any of us puts into tabling and registering<BR>> >> voters is wasted. Having a voter that doesn't vote on our rolls may<BR>> >> keep<BR>> >> the Green Party on the ballot, but it does nothing to build political<BR>> >> strength. The most important question any candidate or initiative<BR>> >> campaign<BR>> >> has is: "How many voters can you turn out on election day".<BR>> >><BR>> >> Greens don't vote. I believe that the way to build political
strength<BR>> >> and to grow our party is to be known as the party that votes. If we<BR>> >> voted,<BR>> >> our endorsements might actually carry some weight.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Last June, in a very low voter turnout election, the percentages posted<BR>> >> by the D's and R's were much higher than Greens. Although it was a<BR>> >> very<BR>> >> low percentage, more than 2,500 Greens voted. I hope to be able to<BR>> >> contact<BR>> >> each voter before the end of the year. If I run out of people to<BR>> >> contact,<BR>> >> I will start on the list of Greens who didn't vote.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Barry<BR>> >><BR>> >> -------- Original Message --------<BR>> >> Subject: Re: [gpca-grow] Only reliable way to preserve ballot<BR>> >> status---how Greens achieved it in the first
place (!)--is through<BR>> >> voter<BR>> >> registration drives<BR>> >> From: <a ymailto="mailto:marnie.glickman@gmail.com" href="javascript:return">marnie.glickman@gmail.com</a><BR>> >> Date: Mon, July 22, 2013 3:10 pm<BR>> >> To: GPCA grow <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >><BR>> >> Barry,<BR>> >><BR>> >> Greens vote at much lower rates than Ds and Rs. Sandy is correct.<BR>> >><BR>> >> I did a study and report in CA Green voter behavior for GPCA. I can<BR>> >> share<BR>> >> a copy if anyone wants to read it again.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Marnie<BR>> >><BR>> >> Sent from my iPhone<BR>> >><BR>> >> On Jul 22, 2013, at 2:41 PM, "Sandy Stiassni" <<a ymailto="mailto:dadcab@sbcglobal.net"
href="javascript:return">dadcab@sbcglobal.net</a>><BR>> >> wrote:<BR>> >><BR>> >> Barry,<BR>> >><BR>> >> Thanks for valuable thoughts about Green voter outreach and<BR>> >> signature<BR>> >> petitions. Voting among registered Greens is strikingly below other<BR>> >> California political parties.<BR>> >> I don't know why this is such a Green statistic, but it's there, in<BR>> >> poll<BR>> >> records, to inspect. Probably it has something to do with California<BR>> >> Green<BR>> >> voter rolls skewed away from young, brown and black, poor, women.<BR>> >> White<BR>> >> middle-aged, middle-income men like you and I, statistically speaking,<BR>> >> like<BR>> >> to talk, not vote.<BR>> >><BR>> >> In OC, Green activists typically see rampant voting
by registered<BR>> >> GOPs, pretty decent Dem get-out-the-vote, abysmally low Election Day<BR>> >> Green<BR>> >> turn-outs, tiny fraction, 6/10th of a percent, of all registered OC<BR>> >> voters. As a Council, we've talked about, debated more effective<BR>> >> outreach<BR>> >> and dialogue--always a good thing--with existing Greens, but have come<BR>> >> to a<BR>> >> perhaps incorrect conclusion, to paraphrase Conrad; it's neither the<BR>> >> ship (nor the skipper), but the people who sail in them, who determine<BR>> >> its<BR>> >> course.<BR>> >><BR>> >> A small nibette of truth: despite Desperate Blond Housewives<BR>> >> persona,<BR>> >> Orange County is remarkably ethnically diverse. It has one of largest<BR>> >> Persian populations in the U.S., whose voters are unevenly
shared<BR>> >> between the two Bigs, more to Republicans. But prior to OC voter rolls<BR>> >> recently were "cleansed" by Registrar of Voters, 20% of registered<BR>> >> Greens<BR>> >> had Persian surnames. Many newly naturalized Iranian-Americans pick<BR>> >> "Green" as symbol of their voter status; in their homeland, to be Green<BR>> >> is<BR>> >> one of a few secular parties free from Islamic political influence. Yet<BR>> >> they've tended not to vote.<BR>> >><BR>> >> If you truly believe--I don't--you can successfully segregate Green<BR>> >> voters into those who regularly and irregularly vote, this could be a<BR>> >> good<BR>> >> way to achieve signature petitions, and do good grassroots work with<BR>> >> local<BR>> >> membership. But while expensive, frustrating, backbreaking,
only<BR>> >> reliable<BR>> >> way to preserve ballot status---how Greens achieved it in the first<BR>> >> place<BR>> >> (!)--is through voter registration drives.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Sandy Stiassni<BR>> >><BR>> >> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >><BR>> >> *From:* <a ymailto="mailto:barry@hermansons.com" href="javascript:return">barry@hermansons.com</a><BR>> >> *To:* Sandy Stiassni <<a ymailto="mailto:dadcab@sbcglobal.net" href="javascript:return">dadcab@sbcglobal.net</a>> ; GPCA Grasswork Organizing<BR>> >> Working Group <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 1:37 PM<BR>> >> *Subject:* RE: State-wide Green voter registration - We must roll up<BR>> >> our<BR>> >> sleeves, and do this the hard
way.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Just like other political parties, approximately 30% of our voters vote<BR>> >> regularly. Voting records will help us identify the 30,000 plus Greens<BR>> >> we<BR>> >> should be contacting statewide.<BR>> >><BR>> >> We spend a great deal of time trying to register new people and almost<BR>> >> no<BR>> >> time reaching out to our existing base. By contacting 30,000 people<BR>> >> who<BR>> >> regularly vote, we will find a few who will become more active in the<BR>> >> party. We may also find a few new donors who will help pay for a<BR>> >> signature<BR>> >> drive campaign. I doubt we have 50 Greens in California (let alone 50<BR>> >> groups) who are ready to go out multiple times per month to table and<BR>> >> register voters.<BR>> >><BR>> >> We
used to have a volunteer in SF who contacted newly registered<BR>> >> Greens.<BR>> >> I plan on doing some of this work in SF and will let you know how it<BR>> >> goes.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Barry<BR>> >><BR>> >> -------- Original Message --------<BR>> >> Subject: State-wide Green voter registration - We must roll up our<BR>> >> sleeves, and do this the hard way.<BR>> >> From: "Sandy Stiassni" <<a ymailto="mailto:dadcab@sbcglobal.net" href="javascript:return">dadcab@sbcglobal.net</a>><BR>> >> Date: Mon, July 22, 2013 1:17 pm<BR>> >> To: "GPCA Grasswork Organizing Working Group" <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> Cc: <<a ymailto="mailto:barry@hermansons.com" href="javascript:return">barry@hermansons.com</a>><BR>> >><BR>> >>
Barry,<BR>> >><BR>> >> I appreciate financial, logistical challenges State-wide Green<BR>> >> voter<BR>> >> registration/<BR>> >> signature drives hold, but don't share as much confidence in existing<BR>> >> Green voters as you.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Attached and enclosed is my perspective on this question. Like it<BR>> >> or<BR>> >> not, we must roll up our sleeves, and do this the hard way.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Sandy Stiassni<BR>> >><BR>> >> Original Message -----<BR>> >> From: <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-ccwg-request@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-ccwg-request@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> To: <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-ccwg@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-ccwg@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 11:46 AM<BR>> >> Subject:
gpca-ccwg Digest, Vol 42, Issue 10<BR>> >><BR>> >> > Today's Topics:<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > 1. 10,000 Signatures: A Noble Goal for a Nobler Cause (Sandy<BR>> >> > Stiassni)<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Message: 1<BR>> >> > Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:02:10 -0700<BR>> >> > From: "Sandy Stiassni" <<a ymailto="mailto:dadcab@sbcglobal.net" href="javascript:return">dadcab@sbcglobal.net</a>><BR>> >> > To: <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-ccwg@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-ccwg@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> > Subject: [gpca-ccwg] 10,000 Signatures: A Noble Goal for a Nobler<BR>> >> > Cause<BR>> >> > Message-ID: <<a ymailto="mailto:70B75EEDD50E48AD9CC5435357FCC218@sr1222nx"
href="javascript:return">70B75EEDD50E48AD9CC5435357FCC218@sr1222nx</a>><BR>> >> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> Hello California Green Activists,<BR>> >><BR>> >> Thank you Warner Bloomberg to furnish timeline and plan to have<BR>> >> 10,000 Greens sign signature petitions, to empower State Constitutional<BR>> >> Green candidates to assume their rightful place on November 2014<BR>> >> ballot.<BR>> >><BR>> >> With no disrespect to approximately 100,000 already<BR>> >> registered California Greens, but careful voting record analysis shows<BR>> >> them<BR>> >> to be NPFs--Non-Propensity Voters--people who would do practically<BR>> >> anything else, rather than go to the polls. Likelihood 10% of them<BR>> >> will<BR>> >> readily
avail themselves of this earnest cause--to get our candidates<BR>> >> on<BR>> >> the ballot--is problematic at best.<BR>> >><BR>> >> How then will Greens get these vital signatures? Go back to<BR>> >> early California Green Party days in the 1990s, when Mike Feinstein and<BR>> >> his<BR>> >> band of Green brothers and sisters lit the State on fire. Over 100,000<BR>> >> new Greens were quickly registered, in a State which had 15% fewer<BR>> >> registered voters than today. Voters today are also younger, poorer,<BR>> >> more<BR>> >> ethnic, with more women than twenty years ago, all which show how<BR>> >> successful these early Green registration canvassers were.<BR>> >><BR>> >> To get 10,000 signature petitions, I say, register 25,000<BR>> >> new California
Greens! Once these new Greens are registered, they<BR>> >> are eligible to sign signature petitions on behalf of Green Party<BR>> >> candidates!<BR>> >><BR>> >> To be successful, from the smallest Green locals, to largest<BR>> >> Councils in Alameda and Los Angeles Counties, all we need are 50 groups<BR>> >> each willing to commit themselves to a minimum of 500 new Green<BR>> >> registrations.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Mike Feinstein, step to the front of the line! Show us how you<BR>> >> did<BR>> >> it! Be the leader California Greens want and need! Help California<BR>> >> Greens obtain 25,000 registrations, for 10,000 signature petitions; a<BR>> >> noble<BR>> >> goal, for a nobler cause!<BR>> >><BR>> >> As ever,<BR>> >><BR>> >> Sandy
Stiassni<BR>> >> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >><BR>> >> *From:* <a ymailto="mailto:barry@hermansons.com" href="javascript:return">barry@hermansons.com</a><BR>> >> *To:* GPCA Grasswork Organizing Working Group <<a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a>><BR>> >> *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 12:55 PM<BR>> >> *Subject:* Re: [gpca-grow] GROW draft agenda July 22nd, 2013<BR>> >><BR>> >> Can we spend a few minutes talking about organizing to gather 15,000<BR>> >> signatures on petitions for our statewide candidates that will be<BR>> >> needed<BR>> >> next January and February? Reaching out to our membership will help<BR>> >> build<BR>> >> the Green Party.<BR>> >><BR>> >> I'm very skeptical of a voter registration strategy that depends
only<BR>> >> on<BR>> >> tabling. We don't have the volunteers who are willing to go out week<BR>> >> after<BR>> >> week and stand on street corners or attend events.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Barry<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>gpca-grow mailing list<BR><a ymailto="mailto:gpca-grow@cagreens.org" href="javascript:return">gpca-grow@cagreens.org</a><BR><a href="http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-grow" target=_blank >http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-grow</a><BR></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>