Summary of Proposals (To-Date) from Cavaretta and D'Arcangel​o

Re: Staffing for the mandate (0.00 / 0)

It would seem sensible to me to pattern the staffing of the MassGOP after the most common model of staffing a campaign. This would include, at a minimum, a Campaign Manager (Executive Director) (whose job is to oversee, supervise and motivate the staff, and to ensure that appropriate research is done and that sensible goals are being met), a Political Director (to maintain the central campaign on message and to quickly work with District folks to bring our message back on track when liberals  advance false premises or promote false statements), a Communications Director (to work with District folks, RCC's, RTC's and campaign staff to most effectively use media contacts and messaging best practices), a Finance Director (who works with local RCC/RTC's and active campaigns to develp and carry out cooperative and value added fundraising), and finally a Field Director.

The Field Director's role would be multi-faceted and critical. Having a Region 6 Activities Coordinator is inadequate, because we have many more urban areas than Boston. The Field Director would be tasked with developing and implementing  a system that both enables and empowers local authorities to reach out to all communities, but ensuring that our untapped groups with naturally conservative values in the urban areas are not overlooked. That means across the state.

This creates a working group, patterned after campaign best practices, that organizes and empowers folks at the local level to take an active role in improving the electability of their candidates, and to ensure that the most money is raised across the board, and that individual candidacies are involved in that fundraising and profit proportionally to their successes.

Meetings need to be held, and outreach activity needs to be a priority for all of these roles vis a vis the RCC/RTC constituencies and ultimately individual candidacies. This provides for leadership, training, mentorship and accountability.

We will win elections one voter at a time, and we will win back party unity one Republican at a time.....We will do that by being in constant contact and providing enthusiastic and positive leadership. Leadership can be best summed up in two words, "Follow Me" and we need to create a good organizational example to follow.

---

by: Chip Jones @ Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 22:59:33 PM UTC

Dean: You cannot win (0.00 / 0)

According to both sides Hughes/Green they have 30 committed votes a piece.

And to complicate things both yourself and teammate are running separately.  Are you that delusional?  

---

by: MiddlesexMan @ Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 01:15:13 AM UTC

Wait, you mean this is your actual proposal? (0.00 / 0)

You are going to build a bureaucracy through task forces?  That sounds like what you have planned.  

Should we start counting Czars like we did with Obama?  

You forgot one other meaningless organizational promise - 'improve customer centricity'.  Good Grief!

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 02:07:23 AM UTC

what (0.00 / 0)

With all due respect I hear rumors of you having trouble managing your own finances. How can you manage a party?

---

by: JustAGoodOleBoy @ Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 02:28:57 AM UTC

I'm looking forward to the Ballet Initiatives (0.00 / 0)

Everyone get your tutu, tights and point shoes!

---

by: JSully @ Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 22:21:58 PM UTC

There is no good reason to take personal shots (0.00 / 0)

Folks,
David and Dean are both class acts. They are concerned about the direction of the party. Certainly a lot of what we've doing hasn't been working.

I personally have endorsed Rick Green and really don't think David or Dean have the support to win. But I believe their ideas need to be looked at and considered.

Rick Green is committed to eliminating the Imperial Chairmanship and wants the entire MA-GOP leadership (including the Staff and State Committee) to start listening to the rank and file activists. Republicans may be few in numbers, that doesn't mean that we're short on ideas. Ideas like David and Dean have suggested a certainly worth discussing as are the idea of many others.

So taking personal shots at Dean or telling them both to get out of the race is uncalled for.

Likewise it is very regrettable that another candidate that has sent out letters trying to divide the State Committee along ideological lines. Said candidate has also posted an endorsement letter that in essence creates a litmus test that disqualifies conservatives from being MA-GOP Chair.

All this is a distraction from the central issue. For decades  MA-GOP resources directed almost entirely on one high profile candidate. We've allowed on candidate to shape the party. The end result is 10% representation in the State Senate-- 19% in House--- Zero statewide office holders, Zero Congressmen, Zero Senators and 11% registration.

The one bright spot was the 2010 victory of Scott Brown in a special election. But we didn't have the infrastructure and ground game to re-elect him in regular election.

That's because we've never bothered to try and elect municipal officials, not to mention the shape of too many City, Town, and Ward Committees. That's where the ground game gets built.

So the essential question for State Committee members will be: Do we want business as usual or do we want to focus enough effort on building the party for the long-term?

All the people who are running are honorable. All of them are talking about building the grassroots. So the question then becomes can we believe that all of them are serious about that.  

---

by: John DiMascio @ Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 13:00:10 PM UTC