Green-Rainbow Party 2002 Election Debriefings

In order to better understand what went right and wrong in the 2002 elections, the Candidate Development and Legal Committee held a series of debriefings for both candidates and campaign activists. We held a session for all candidates for state office in 2002. We also held two sessions for activists (one in Eastern Mass. and one in Western Mass.) in the early part of 2003. For complete summaries of each of these meetings, please contact a member of the Candidate Development & Legal Committee.

Major Conclusions from the 2002 campaigns

Achievements

• Projected credibility on issues (media and public viewed the candidates stances as logical arguments);
• Created momentum for electoral reform (IRV, Instant Runoff Voting, is moving forward on the state agenda);
• Got statewide candidates into debate;
• Ran very visible campaigns for state representatives;
• Succeeded at merging of Green and Rainbow Party;
• Energized volunteers;
• Developed great and lasting relationships among the volunteers;
• Generated excitement about the candidates and commitment by volunteers to help build the party.

Pitfalls

• Did not win any state races (though we came close in some):
• Lacked training/cultivation of volunteers;
• *very little or non-effective training of volunteers;
• *sentiment that there was a lack of appreciation of the work done by volunteers;
• *too much cheerleading, not enough training.
• Lacked “2 way flow” of information between GRP state and local organizations:
• *some local organizations felt that the Stein campaign was forced upon them;
• *inadequate support from GRP state for campaigns;
• *inadequate support from GRP state for locals;
• *state party was perceived as unresponsive to local needs/concerns.
• Lacked organization in the GRP:
• *website difficult to navigate, information outdated or incorrect, (from the people new to the GRP) hard to figure out how to get involved, which email lists to subscribe;
• *voter registration lists not available;
• *some attendees felt that all the locals and events were “too far away” to be able to get involved;
• *some attendees felt that locals/members voices not being heard in a “democratic” fashion.
• Lack of money:
• *did not qualify for Clean Elections money;
• poor planning/changing strategies/not enough preliminary work done before kicking off campaign drove away volunteers from campaigns. Interestingly, very well planned and organized campaigns retained volunteers and kept morale high even after setbacks such as not getting Clean Elections money.

Solutions

After generating this important feedback, we would like to implement plans that address the pitfalls of the campaigns and enhance our achievements. Some of our proposed solutions are described below. New and different suggestions are always welcome, please contact a member of the candidate development committee to provide your comments and suggestions.

A * denotes a solution that the party is currently implementing.

In no particular order:

• *formalized system of informational and training sessions for campaign activists and candidates held on a regular basis;
• volunteers (especially new ones) should work in groups of 2-3 (participants said that working with others was most rewarding personally and also helpful for learning);
• volunteers need to be treated with respect—events and activities for volunteers create energy and are essential for keeping volunteers engaged and feeling important; candidates and campaign staff need to pay stronger attention to team-building;
• *regional clubs (e.g. Connecticut River Valley Greens) created for areas that do not have active locals; these clubs can have regional representatives who can help draw these areas into the decision making process of the state committee;
• need more formal channels for communicating information from state to regions to locals and from locals to regions to state; also need more formal description of roles and responsibilities at each level to prevent breakdowns or misunderstandings;
• *lists of registered GRP voters by district, town, ward, etc. be made available;
• maps of districts be made available, used for planning door to door campaigning
• guidelines for amount of state support given to each candidate, e.g. certain goals must be reached to get X amount of funding, resources, etc.
• *update GRP website (new lists of locals, town coordinators, etc.; streamline the website);
• more active locals created.