Options
The Official ANA Election Endorsement Thread™
Longacre
Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
Although there are several threads going regarding the upcoming ANA election, I was hoping to have a thread where each board member had the opportunity to provide their official endorsement for particular candidates.
I wrote an analysis of the various candidates in other threads, so my statements below probably look familiar. After doing additional research since my original thread on the subject, I was able to narrow down the candidates who will get my support. My opinions are based on the specificity of the candidates’ statements that appeared in Numismatist and Coin World, as well as other statements that have been made in public settings.
Below are the candidates who will receive the official Longacre Endorsement™ for the election:
(1) Carl Schwenker III– this candidate seems to have good, old fashioned credentials. He is a retired corporate executive and has a proven track record for turning around troubled businesses. I wish he gave more specifics about exactly what he has done in the real world in this respect, but this experience is something that the board could use. The ANA is broken, and is in need of someone who can fix things. I also like his platform which includes “fixing the finances” and optimizing the business plan. The ANA should be run like a business, and these are two good things to start with.
(2) Anthony Tumonis– I like his grassroots approach to helping the ANA. The current board of governors has too many glad-handers and pretty faces, who don’t accomplish much for the current members. I like Tumonis’ ideas of returning to regular meetings, and expanding the use of regional coordinators. The reinstatement of ANA club representatives is a good idea too. I also like his comments about meeting notices, agendas, and requiring the executive director to inform the board about many more things.
(3) Wendell Wolka–I like his succinct platform, which states that the ANA should promote education as its main focus in order to develop interest in the organization and numismatics. I also like his idea that the budget should be balanced (a novel idea), and growth should not come at the expense of sound financial management principles. I feel as though today’s ANA is run like the federal government, with a lot of short term goals and quick fixes, rather than an organization that is run with a measure of responsibility.
(4) Clifford Mishler–I like this candidate’s business experience and his increasing responsibilities during his tenure at Krause Publications. He is not just another pretty face. He appears to be someone who will actually get something done. I also like how he takes a realist’s view of the role of a board of governors. He states that the board should be a membership conduit, establishing beneficial policies and guidelines to be executed by management staff. What a novel idea! It almost seems like this guy used to be on a board of directors in real life.
He also states that the board has a responsibility for overseeing implementation of those policies and guidelines to the benefit of membership. What another novel idea!! Is this guy from Mars or something? If he gets elected, I doubt that I will be referring to the ANA group as the Board of Buffoons anymore.
*******
I believe that there are seven governor’s seats up for election. I still have three votes in reserve, but don’t feel the need to use them.
Although Michael Doran has not received an official Longacre Endorsement™, I do thank him for taking the time to directly respond to inquiries posted on these boards, which is more than other candidates have done.
It is my understanding that the President and Vice President are running unopposed. I am not a big fan of that, and therefore will not vote for either.
I wrote an analysis of the various candidates in other threads, so my statements below probably look familiar. After doing additional research since my original thread on the subject, I was able to narrow down the candidates who will get my support. My opinions are based on the specificity of the candidates’ statements that appeared in Numismatist and Coin World, as well as other statements that have been made in public settings.
Below are the candidates who will receive the official Longacre Endorsement™ for the election:
(1) Carl Schwenker III– this candidate seems to have good, old fashioned credentials. He is a retired corporate executive and has a proven track record for turning around troubled businesses. I wish he gave more specifics about exactly what he has done in the real world in this respect, but this experience is something that the board could use. The ANA is broken, and is in need of someone who can fix things. I also like his platform which includes “fixing the finances” and optimizing the business plan. The ANA should be run like a business, and these are two good things to start with.
(2) Anthony Tumonis– I like his grassroots approach to helping the ANA. The current board of governors has too many glad-handers and pretty faces, who don’t accomplish much for the current members. I like Tumonis’ ideas of returning to regular meetings, and expanding the use of regional coordinators. The reinstatement of ANA club representatives is a good idea too. I also like his comments about meeting notices, agendas, and requiring the executive director to inform the board about many more things.
(3) Wendell Wolka–I like his succinct platform, which states that the ANA should promote education as its main focus in order to develop interest in the organization and numismatics. I also like his idea that the budget should be balanced (a novel idea), and growth should not come at the expense of sound financial management principles. I feel as though today’s ANA is run like the federal government, with a lot of short term goals and quick fixes, rather than an organization that is run with a measure of responsibility.
(4) Clifford Mishler–I like this candidate’s business experience and his increasing responsibilities during his tenure at Krause Publications. He is not just another pretty face. He appears to be someone who will actually get something done. I also like how he takes a realist’s view of the role of a board of governors. He states that the board should be a membership conduit, establishing beneficial policies and guidelines to be executed by management staff. What a novel idea! It almost seems like this guy used to be on a board of directors in real life.
He also states that the board has a responsibility for overseeing implementation of those policies and guidelines to the benefit of membership. What another novel idea!! Is this guy from Mars or something? If he gets elected, I doubt that I will be referring to the ANA group as the Board of Buffoons anymore.*******
I believe that there are seven governor’s seats up for election. I still have three votes in reserve, but don’t feel the need to use them.
Although Michael Doran has not received an official Longacre Endorsement™, I do thank him for taking the time to directly respond to inquiries posted on these boards, which is more than other candidates have done.
It is my understanding that the President and Vice President are running unopposed. I am not a big fan of that, and therefore will not vote for either.
Always took candy from strangers
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
0
Comments
Wendell is a good guy who has done a lot for the SPMC and is more well known in paper money circles than with coins. However, even though he is not an incumbent I can't vote for him as he has aligned himself with the current regime governors that are running as a team. I would like a clean sweep of the old mindset on the board of governors.
Cliff is a good negotiator and seems to have a knack for bringing people together and resolving differences. He got the ANA to drop
a lawsuit against Krause Publications after they published a story in Numismatic News that angered the ANA, he also has worked with
the MSNS (Michigan State Numismatic Society) in resolving differences between people that were hurting the organization.
Cliff has my vote.
<< <i>I'm wondering about some of the names that are not on your list. >>
I decided that it would not be useful to explain why I am not endorsing particular candidates. Too much negativity could come from that.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i> I would like a clean sweep of the old mindset on the board of governors. >>
Complete and total agreement.
I will, gladly, cast a vote for Michael Doran!
It's fantastic that one of us, someone who has been here, and will continue to be here, is running for the Board. As far as I have seen, he's answered the tough questions here and he is bringing a new perspective.
Clifford Mishler will get my vote.
Brian
<< <i>I will, gladly, cast a vote for Michael Doran! >>
Totally agree. I'd like to know why Longacre is withholding his endorsement of Michael.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Although there are several threads going regarding the upcoming ANA election, I was hoping to have a thread where each board member had the opportunity to provide their official endorsement for particular candidates.
I wrote an analysis of the various candidates in other threads, so my statements below probably look familiar. After doing additional research since my original thread on the subject, I was able to narrow down the candidates who will get my support. My opinions are based on the specificity of the candidates’ statements that appeared in Numismatist and Coin World, as well as other statements that have been made in public settings.
Below are the candidates who will receive the official Longacre Endorsement™ for the election:
(1) Carl Schwenker III– this candidate seems to have good, old fashioned credentials. He is a retired corporate executive and has a proven track record for turning around troubled businesses. I wish he gave more specifics about exactly what he has done in the real world in this respect, but this experience is something that the board could use. The ANA is broken, and is in need of someone who can fix things. I also like his platform which includes “fixing the finances” and optimizing the business plan. The ANA should be run like a business, and these are two good things to start with.
(2) Anthony Tumonis– I like his grassroots approach to helping the ANA. The current board of governors has too many glad-handers and pretty faces, who don’t accomplish much for the current members. I like Tumonis’ ideas of returning to regular meetings, and expanding the use of regional coordinators. The reinstatement of ANA club representatives is a good idea too. I also like his comments about meeting notices, agendas, and requiring the executive director to inform the board about many more things.
(3) Wendell Wolka–I like his succinct platform, which states that the ANA should promote education as its main focus in order to develop interest in the organization and numismatics. I also like his idea that the budget should be balanced (a novel idea), and growth should not come at the expense of sound financial management principles. I feel as though today’s ANA is run like the federal government, with a lot of short term goals and quick fixes, rather than an organization that is run with a measure of responsibility.
(4) Clifford Mishler–I like this candidate’s business experience and his increasing responsibilities during his tenure at Krause Publications. He is not just another pretty face. He appears to be someone who will actually get something done. I also like how he takes a realist’s view of the role of a board of governors. He states that the board should be a membership conduit, establishing beneficial policies and guidelines to be executed by management staff. What a novel idea! It almost seems like this guy used to be on a board of directors in real life.
*******
I believe that there are seven governor’s seats up for election. I still have three votes in reserve, but don’t feel the need to use them.
Although Michael Doran has not received an official Longacre Endorsement™, I do thank him for taking the time to directly respond to inquiries posted on these boards, which is more than other candidates have done.
It is my understanding that the President and Vice President are running unopposed. I am not a big fan of that, and therefore will not vote for either. >>
While I am disappointed that I will not receiving an official Longacre Endorsement, I do have to agree with him about the President and Vice President running unopposed. I too am not a big fan of that, and therefore I also will not vote for them either.
1. Cliff Mishler
2. Chet Krause
3. Ed Rochette
4. Joe Boling
5. Tony Tumonis
6. Walt Ostromecki
After reading additional comments here and rereading his write-up, I have added Carl Schwenker to my list for the seventh vote, which already included Mike Doran and Radford Stearns. I will be away for a week starting tomorrow so I hope to have my ballot when I return. I will let you all know my final choice at that time.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
<< <i>Here is a lesser known but interesting fact - did you know that in this election there are 2 board of governor candidates each from the following states - California (Don Kagin, Walt Ostromecki), Illinois (Michael Doran, Don Dool), Indiana (Joe Boling, Wendell Wolka), and Wisconsin (Chet Krause, Cliff Mishler). And here's another fact - of the four states mentioned, California, Wisconsin, and Indiana has had governors from those states in the last 10 years, while Illinois has not had one since the late 1980's/early 1990's (Donn Perlmann (AKA halfsense)). >>
Is that a problem? I don't think so.
Except for one person Longacre cited, I can live with the other three candidates.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
I'd like to discuss who NOT to vote for.
Mishler, I'm not so sure about. I have reservations about voting for someone involved in big business or the media (Mishler, Krause, Kagin, etc.). I wonder what favors they might do for their own organizations while on the ANA board.
And I didn't like the way the Wisconsin State Quarter Commission was run (nor the final resulting coin). Mishler was on that commission. Maybe none of it was his fault. But I think they could have and should have done a much better job.
And lastly, I'm not voting for anyone who is a past or recent board member. Like I said previously, Ostromecki got a raw deal in his ouster. But I'd rather elect board members with a fresh go-forward attitude than someone that might have revenge on their mind.
<< <i>Where's the "Official ANA Election Reject Thread" ?
I'd like to discuss who NOT to vote for. >>
Any incumbants?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is a lesser known but interesting fact - did you know that in this election there are 2 board of governor candidates each from the following states - California (Don Kagin, Walt Ostromecki), Illinois (Michael Doran, Don Dool), Indiana (Joe Boling, Wendell Wolka), and Wisconsin (Chet Krause, Cliff Mishler). And here's another fact - of the four states mentioned, California, Wisconsin, and Indiana has had governors from those states in the last 10 years, while Illinois has not had one since the late 1980's/early 1990's (Donn Perlmann (AKA halfsense)). >>
Is that a problem? I don't think so.
Except for one person Longacre cited, I can live with the other three candidates. >>
WTCG - Did I even say that there was a problem? Figured I'd put in a lesser but interestingly known fact.
<< <i>As I stated in other threads, I will vote for:
1. Cliff Mishler
2. Chet Krause
3. Ed Rochette
4. Joe Boling
5. Tony Tumonis
6. Walt Ostromecki
After reading additional comments here and rereading his write-up, I have added Carl Schwenker to my list for the seventh vote, which already included Mike Doran and Radford Stearns. I will be away for a week starting tomorrow so I hope to have my ballot when I return. I will let you all know my final choice at that time.
Steve
I am serious reservations about Schwenker and Wolka because, after Stuppler's plans for the ANA and the contributions they made to this plan, that they may be pro-regime - but I could be wrong
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
<< <i>I do not believe that Carl or Wendell have any allegiance to Barry. >>
You could be right, Julian, but you could stand a chance of being wrong like anyone else (myself included). People can surprise others.
Mr. Tumonis: I had the pleasure of meeting Anthony on two occasions, both at local (Phoenix) coin shows. He is from Tucson, and comes up frequently to participate. Helpful, friendly and down-to-earth; just what we need in the ANA right now!
Mr. Doran: i think it is wonderful that he shares his views with us here.
Mr. Schwenker: for the same reasons that Longacre posted about. makes sense to me!
<< <i>But I'd rather elect board members with a fresh go-forward attitude than someone that might have revenge on their mind. >>
Hmmm, that is an interesting thought!!
Would having board members that only care about revenge might be the best thing for the ANA?
I was thinking of the Wrath of Khan, that Star Trek movie! At least he worked hard for his goals!
LOL.
I will add my support to the above comments about Carl Schwenker who I know personally. Carl has done a great job with the Houston show and as a retired corporate executive does seem to understand what is needed to run a more businesslike organization. Carl was appointed as a member (perhaps even chair, I don't recall exactly) of the ANA finance committe a couple of years back and resigned when it became clear the expectation was for the committee to sit around and do little rather than overhaul the organization's finances as Carl wanted to do when he accepted the appointment. He spent the time needed to understand the organization's finances and came up with the proposals to start changing things but had all of his suggestions tabled and postponed. I understand from Carl that he and Barry don't see eye to eye on everything but Barry knows Carl and respects his background and experience. The ANA board is structured to be very weak. It will be important to have board members who can convince the President and Executive Director to make change. IMHO Carl is the perfect blend of "tact" and "bulldog" to get things done. When he grabs onto an issue, he doesn't let it go but yet approaches others in a positive way so that they are not immediately turned off. I also know that as a busy person there's no way he'd waste his time running for the position if he didn't plan on giving it a lot of his energy (which does seem amazing boundless). In his case, being an ANA governor is about improving the hobby he enjoys and not about building name recognition for his coin business (he's not a dealer) or padding his resume for some greater agenda.
WH
<< <i>
<< <i>But I'd rather elect board members with a fresh go-forward attitude than someone that might have revenge on their mind. >>
Hmmm, that is an interesting thought!!
Would having board members that only care about revenge might be the best thing for the ANA?
I was thinking of the Wrath of Khan, that Star Trek movie! At least he worked hard for his goals!
LOL. >>
I doubt there are any candidates that have "revenge" as their only motivation for running (even Walt and who could really blame
him if he did?). If it is a choice between the status quo or candidates that want to make changes I will take the changes even if
there is some anger involved.
At the top of my list are:
[b[Boling: Everything he mentions in the ANA--"renting" the ANA's name to the highest bidder, museums, and staff morale--is important to me. I wish he had mentioned something about board issues, but I think he still has my vote.
Krause: I think his past experience in running Krause Publications auger well for his ability to help provide good guidance for the ANA.
Mishler: Ditto my comments about Krause.
Rochette: I am surprised that Longacre and others haven't mentioned him enthusiastically. He has done it all: Executive director of the ANA, past board member, editor of the Numismatist...whenever the ANA needed someone because it was in a bind, Rochette seemed to step in and do a fine job.
Tumonis: Everything he says about greater transparency seems to me to be right on the mark. I also like his ideas for clubs.
DEFINITELY not getting my vote are:
Bourne: Apparently the prime write of the new by-laws, a candidate who wants to build bridges between the ANA and clubs in China rather than the ANA and its members.
Herbert: A candidate who thinks the current board is on the right track. I disagree and so he will not be receiving my vote.
Kagin: I like what he says NOW but why was he unable to say it during the past two years when he was a governor?
I have questions/doubts about:
Doran: Can he work with others and can he pause a moment before he responds?
Wolka: I did not like the fact that he was featured in Stuppler's "I will vote for" page on the NGC site. I wish I KNEW he'd be independent.
Stearns: Seems to have a good business related background. Why is not being mentioned by more people as a candidate they like?
Schwenker: Ditto my comments about Wolka.
This will be my only post to an ANA politics thread. Those of you who know me well will know my reasoning (not positive or negative, just a good reason).
I know Wendall Wolka and Carl Schwenker relatively well I think. There is nothing in the time I've known these two gentlemen that would lead me to think either would ever do something contrary to their personally held belief of what is best for the ANA.
If you're an ANA member -- you have two choices: vote, or no complaining!
<< <i>I have questions/doubts about:
Doran: Can he work with others and can he pause a moment before he responds? >>
ANSWER - Yes on both questions. Still not sure, ask numisma, who I worked with during his tenure with Jade Rare Coin.
<< <i>Wolka: I did not like the fact that he was featured in Stuppler's "I will vote for" page on the NGC site. I wish I KNEW he'd be independent. >>
ANSWER - I don't feel that Mr. Wolka could be totally independent of the regime, but stranger things can happen.
<< <i>Stearns: Seems to have a good business related background. Why is not being mentioned by more people as a candidate they like? >>
ANSWER - I have met Mr. Stearns at Central States. He is the real deal, and, IMHO, would make a good governor. Did Stearns mention that he was a retired dentist and that in some cultures teeth was used as a means of exchange (aka money)? Very interesting!
<< <i>Schwenker: Ditto my comments about Wolka. >>
ANSWER - I also met Mr. Schwenker, and while I am impressed with his credentials, I have some reservations about him, but not as much as Wolka.
I appreciate very much your comments about Wolka and Schwenker very much. Both sets of comments are quite helpful.
I also appreciate Dorancoins' comment about ... Dorancoins!
<< <i>
<< <i>I will, gladly, cast a vote for Michael Doran! >>
Totally agree. I'd like to know why Longacre is withholding his endorsement of Michael. >>
No offense, but I really don't care why he is doing so. Frankly, he's just another poster here and, to me, has no influence. He's stated an individual opinion, just like mine and both are worth little more than that.
I do think that anyone who regularly posts here and does not vote for Michael Doran is cutting off their nose to spite their face. He's the only one of us with the fortitude to run, despite all our talk of needing change for the past years. Plus, we would have a member of our community sitting on the ANA Board.
If those alone are not good enough reasons why we should vote for Doran, I don't think it's possible to give any better reasons.
<< <i>
While I am disappointed that I will not receiving an official Longacre Endorsement, I do have to agree with him about the President and Vice President running unopposed. I too am not a big fan of that, and therefore I also will not vote for them either. >>
Longacre's support is not critical to winning. I suspect you will get the votes of over 95% of the voting members here.
<< <i>
<< <i>As I stated in other threads, I will vote for:
1. Cliff Mishler
2. Chet Krause
3. Ed Rochette
4. Joe Boling
5. Tony Tumonis
6. Walt Ostromecki
After reading additional comments here and rereading his write-up, I have added Carl Schwenker to my list for the seventh vote, which already included Mike Doran and Radford Stearns. I will be away for a week starting tomorrow so I hope to have my ballot when I return. I will let you all know my final choice at that time.
Steve
I am serious reservations about Schwenker and Wolka because, after Stuppler's plans for the ANA and the contributions they made to this plan, that they may be pro-regime - but I could be wrong >>
Anyone endorsed by a current Board member is not receiving my vote. Unless, they reject the endorsement.
<< <i>No offense, but I really don't care why he is doing so. Frankly, he's just another poster here and, to me, has no influence. He's stated an individual opinion, just like mine and both are worth little more than that. >>
I agree.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Has anyone else gotten their's?
<< <i>I haven't received my ballot yet, here in DC.
Has anyone else gotten their's? >>
They showed up today here. Should be another day or two to the east coast I suspect.
<< <i>
<< <i>I haven't received my ballot yet, here in DC.
Has anyone else gotten their's? >>
They showed up today here. Should be another day or two to the east coast I suspect. >>
No ballots here in the Land of Lincoln as of yet.
VOTING FOR:
1. Edward C. Rochette
2. Walter Ostromecki
3. Clifford Mishler
4. Chester L. Krause
5. Anthony Tumonis
6. Joseph Boling
7. Michael B. Doran
LOOK LIKE GOOD CANDIDATES, BUT NOT ENOUGH FOR MY SUPPORT:
8. Donald H. Dool
9. John R. Eshbach
10. Radford Stearns
11. Wendell A. Wolka
12. Carl Schwenker
NOT QUALIFIED, AND WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ANA's FUTURE:
13. Donald H. Kagin
14. M. Remy Bourne
15. Arthur M. Fitts III
16. Alan Herbert
WH
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Perhaps Michael is a bit too quick to type out response postings but in this instantaneous world of communication to be any slower in his responses would almost appear to be disinterested! Furthermore, I expect him to be more measured when in a large group setting.
Yet, I also want Donald H. Kagin as I believe that he will represent a non Dwight Manley board member for sure. I am not sure that I want an ANA board that is beholden to Mr. Manley. I am impressed with his efforts to get the Old SF Mint Commem minted to raise monies for the Old Granite Lady (SF MINt) which in my view probably hurt Kagin time element in his first 1 1/2 years on the ANA board. But I believe he was working for an even higher and noble objective at the time which will benefit us all in the long run!
My other choices will be posted later.
I will not vote for the candidates that have little more to say than "vote the bums out". I already get enough political BS from the Republicans and Democrats, thank you.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
By definition is not blindly committed to a slate, its positions, and should not, IMHO, accept any contributions from anyone.
Votes on issues with an open mind regarding what is best for the Association and its members and not based on what "our side" wants done.
Will undoubtedly enrage BOTH sides over time (if the candidate is fortunate enough to be elected) with his voting stance. NO ONE has a monopoly on the RIGHT answers to everything ALL THE TIME.
Is flattered if he receives endorsements from both "sides" as this is the surest validation of the candidate's independence.
Wendell Wolka believes that, based on the above, he is running as an Independent Candidate for the ANA Board.
Has the current Board made mistakes? Absolutely! Do we need to have a fresh evaluation of the issues and spend our energy on the most critical ones? You bet! Does either "side" have a monopoly on all of the correct answers and all of the best ideas? Of course not. Let's use everyone's best ideas for the improvement of the ANA regardless of "the side" that you perceive them as being aligned with
Whomever you vote for, vote for people who you believe have the courage of their convictions and experience in the "real world" to propel the ANA forward to a bigger and better future. I believe that I can do that and ask for your vote in the upcoming election if you agree with me.
I didn't end up voting for you Michael, but it's great that you ran and I wish you the best of luck. Hopefully, regardless of the outcome, you'll learn from the experience and use that knowledge to temper a future election you campaign for.
Self Indulgence | Holey Coins | Flickr Photostream
<< <i>I will vote for the candidates with specific, ambitious, intelligent plans for action, and the skills to turn those plans into reality. These candidates include some incumbents and some newcomers. >>
Agreed, I actually voted for an incumbent or two in the end.
Self Indulgence | Holey Coins | Flickr Photostream
<< <i>I mailed off my ballot today.
I didn't end up voting for you Michael, but it's great that you ran and I wish you the best of luck. Hopefully, regardless of the outcome, you'll learn from the experience and use that knowledge to temper a future election you campaign for. >>
Dthigpen, I am disappointed that you didn't vote for me, but you are entitled to whoever you wish to vote for like anyone else.
If I do not win this campaign, I have plan to run for the Central States board (on the third try) in 2008 and stick around in ILNA for a fourth (and possibly final) term as Secretary.
I may well vote for you but I must say that I always think it strange when someone refers to himself or herself in the 3rd person. In other words, Mark may well vote for you but Mark must say that Mark always thinks it strange when someone refers to himself or herself in the 3rd person.
Now, more seriously, I sure hope you stick around (a'la Michael) and post frequently.
Self Indulgence | Holey Coins | Flickr Photostream
<< <i>
<< <i>I will vote for the candidates with specific, ambitious, intelligent plans for action, and the skills to turn those plans into reality. These candidates include some incumbents and some newcomers. >>
Agreed, I actually voted for an incumbent or two in the end. >>
That is your right, which I respect, however, I think it was a very big mistake.
<< <i>Agreed, I actually voted for an incumbent or two in the end. >>
dthigpen, I'm curious as to which incumbents you voted for and why they earned your vote?
I also echo magicrat's question. Though, if you do not wish to post for whom you voted, I can easily understand that position.
I have, tentively, made up my mind on who I will be voting for, once it does arrive, in this particular order. If the name is at the top, they are a lock for my vote. Names near the bottom might be changed as I get closer to filling out my ballot.
1. Walt Ostromecki
2. Mike Dolan
3. Chet Krause
4. Ed Rochette
5. Cliff Mishler
6. Tony Timoris
7. Joe Boling
I am not casting a vote for either President or Vice President. I wish they did count all the votes for these offices but, according, to Coin World, it appears they are prohibited from doing so. Still, much as I like Barry and Patti, I hope they get far fewer votes than whom I regard as reform minded Board members so as to send a message.
I am not voting for anyone who is an incumbent, previously served on the Board (other than Walt and his unique situation) in the recent past. As for other non-incumbents that I am not voting for, my reasons basically come down to the fact that I do not feel/think/believe they are as committed to reform as I believe the next Board must be. I am very cautious as to which candidates endorsed other candidates.
I'm just one guy, expressing what is only my opinion. I do not expect, or have earned the right, for others to consider my view, or myself, in a leadership role. I beliieve the next Board must be committed to substantial change and, possibly, needs to do a 180 turn from the past. That only starts, IMHO, with new and fresh faces, largely unincumbered to anyone who has served in the past several years.
I think the organization is in trouble and need of overall. These seven people that I am voting for, I believe will begin the process and offer the best chance of success.