I really love this list -- and so of course I'll quibble a bit to try to improve it.
(1) is a little narrow, and I'm sure you wouldn't object to efforts related to ballot initiatives, races to help maintain ballot access, or even unwinnable races to give our voters an option to protest the nanny state. (5) and (10) seem like nice-to-have's, and not deal-breakers. The list could perhaps be augmented somehow to recognize that local parties don't exist in every county, or that they might not have sufficient instituational memory capacity. I like the candidacy description you posted next, but I agree it could scare off some marginal candidates who just want to dip their toe in the water. We should not understimate the value of modest first-time starter campaigns. Jim Eyer wrote: criteria to use to evaluate the merits of LPC participating in any specific activity: 1. It addresses one or more needs or challenges related to the primary goal of any political party: to get people elected. 2. Does not cause untenable BCRA-related risk. 3. It seems generally appropriate for the state party organization to be involved. 4. Without state party organization involvement the need(s) would not be addressed. 5. The activity empowers local parties to support candidates. 6. There is a reasonable definition of success including timeline and metrics. 7. Expected benefits exceed cost. 8. Necessary resources are attainable or available. 9. Clear economies of scale exist. 10. County organizations want it.
