Controversy Over GOP Delegate List

At least we now know for certain who the insider establishment candidate is....

Or, perhaps the candidate with the best campaign team.

Jealousy will get you nowhere, Ken.

"We have people with connections with the party"............

In the long history of Maine politics, was ever a truer statement made??.................LOL!!

Those that asked for the list, got it. When someone complained that they did not have the list, it was sent to all the campaigns.

I have been involved in a number of primary campaigns. We always requested the list and got it.

People who have contacts use them. People who don't have contacts moan and gripe about contacts until they get some. Then they use 'em.

I too have contacts. I see or speak with Charlie Webster daily and never received a hint that he favored or opposed Abbott. He'll offer advice to anyone who asks. This is not to say that Abbott doesn't have other contacts. Probably does, but I can't say.

Perhaps more concerning is that of more than 2,000 names on the list, there are barely 400 e-mail addresses.

The limited number of emails should be a concern. Particularly for the Republican Party and eventual nominee in terms of the general election. Email is an effective, inexpensive and timely means of communication. I would think this would particularly help legislative candidates with limited budgets.

This probably should be something emphasized more going forward - although I know it is an ongoing process due to the fact emails change frequently.

Not to mention, some people don't want their email addresses put on every list out there. Some people refuse to give their email addresses when signing up for mailing lists, same with phone numbers.

I would be more concerned with this list getting into the hands of people who it should not. Folks who will use it for non politcal campaigns.

And reading some of the responses here, it already has.

Steven Scharf
SCSMedia@aol.com

To be honest with you, neither my wife or I signed up for these e-mails...but find them informative about two of the candidates. However, the only ones that we receive them from are Abbott & Jacobson as well as the State GOP website. I realize that all the candidates were given all the same information, but if this is the case...then why are we only hearing from just these two on a regular basis. Do the other candidates expect the public to sign up for their newsletters? I kind of like the idea that the Abbott and Jacobson campaigns taking the bull by the horns and sending us updates because it shows us that they want our votes. We also have a junk e-mail address that we are using for this that cost us nothing. This is my opinion.

The early bird gets the worms.

Hey! Who're you calling a worm?
lol

I understand why people don't like to provide their emails; I'm just saying it's a bit of a problem for the party in terms of communication and organizational efficiency. Probably more needs to be done in this area and additional steps taken to be sure concerns like those mentioned already are addressed.

The thing is that with the ones that you have, the candidates should take advantage of what is there. The worse thing that can happen is that somebody will decide to unsubscribe from the candidate's e-mail later on. That is their choice to do so. No big deal.

There are voter lists. Then there is THE list. That's the list that shows every license and office held by the voter. You could send a letter targeted to town officials who snowmobile and hunt. You could send a letter to mortgage brokers who ride motorcycles. The data base is huge and available to favored candidates. To be fair, THE list is not generated by party headquarters in Augusta. They don't have the resources to generate such a list. They just have voter lists that anybody can get.

"You could send a letter targeted to town officials who snowmobile and hunt. You could send a letter to mortgage brokers who ride motorcycles. The data base is huge and available to favored candidates."

There is a pretty huge difference between email to supporters and spam...I appreciate those who know the difference...

Can you tell me which candidates are sending such spam?

There is a pretty huge difference between email to supporters and spam...I appreciate those who know the difference...

Do you know the difference?

Political speech

Robert...I was talking about the practical meaning of spam...not the legal definition...

When I make the decision to not vote for someone because they send me unwanted email...or...for that matter...ruin my dinner with phone calls...the legal definition means absolutely nothing to me...

Campaign literature can be custom tailored to appeal to the voter's interests. Most candidates send out campaign literature to garner support. This is not new. Most voters read campaign literature with interest. If you can guarantee that the voter has a hunting license you have an advantage over another candidate.

I understand the logic, Roger Ek...and I know it is shared by many politicians...

I am merely stating my position...and I know it too is shared by many voters...

People who want to be sheltered from information and discussion seem to me to be the sort of people who prefer to remain blissfully ignorant of the world around them.

Ken,

I beg to differ. Some people merely want to protect their privacy. By declining to give phone numbers, e-mail etc. does not mean they are ignoring issues, as you imply. Perhaps they wish to remain anonymous and are lurkers looking into candidate web sites or stopping by offices to pick up literature. I have one friend who refuses to sign anything because he says, "All they want is money." yet he is an active and involved man in the community where he lives. He actually told me he stopped giving donations to candidates when the experience led to his being placed on lists for follow donations. His attitude is that "a thank you would suffice and then they could spend the rtime and energy prospecting other folks." He says if it were legal he'd do anonymous cash drops to campaigns in which he truly believes but he believes list-bots make the donor uncomfortable.

I am referring to getting campaign and public policy info in the mail. People are entitled to their privacy. But I find it curious that some people just don't want to get any info that might conflict with their world views - somehow finding it offensive.

For some of us, it has absolutely nothing to do with information that "might conflict with our world view." It's about privacy, as well as cutting down on the heap or junk paper accumulating in my recycling bin.

Does campaign literature from a candidate usually "inform" people about anything? I have not seen many pieces that I would consider educational. :)

Bob, as a candidate you can set a new standard ;)

Mike Tipping has a bit more on this here.

Charlie Webster claims that someone stole the list on behalf of the Abbott campaign and then says the whole thing makes the Paul LePage campaign look bad? I guess we know who Webster is pulling for/against.

This is a serious matter. Who stole the list?

After reading that story Gerald linked, here are my thoughts. Mike Tipping, who works for the Maine People's Alliance and is no friend to Republicans, was given something that could only have made him giddy.

He didnt have to do any leg work. A couple activists from the campaign of a GOP candidate for governor took secret tape recordings at the GOP convention of the Party chairman and a GOP candidate for governor. They then took that information and gave it to a Democrat operative/blogger with the suggestion that it shouldn't be used against their candidate because he doesn't run a "dirty" campaign?

These two geniuses thought they were the next Karl Rove but they played right into the hands of Maine's Karl Marx.

HC
With respect, you are shooting the messenger.