Mideast Citizens for Progress and Reform

[TJ in Oregon]

Good luck with the new party! I'm not going to jump ship from the Whigs, but I am glad to see a new party here to fill the center-right (by Atlasian standards) void we have at the moment.

[TJ in Oregon]

Good luck with the new party! I'm not going to jump ship from the Whigs, but I am glad to see a new party here to fill the center-right (by Atlasian standards) void we have at the moment.

Void? Why, I thought we were center-right.

In real life yes. But in Atlasia, most of the more moderate RPPers did not join the Whigs. A lot of them didn't really join any party to be honest, except for those in the IDS.

Anyway, I've cluttered this long enough with ideological semantics. Good luck!

[TJ in Oregon]

I think it would make sense for me to join as a member of the Whig Party still, as I may or may not already have put myself in the middle of the Mideast's reform discussion.

In short when it comes to assembly numbers, I think:
-5 members is preferable to 3. That has always been my position from when it changed and I was lonely in opposing it to now when it has become popular again. The main reason is that having more members spurs more activity because having more new people involved in the game means bringing new perspectives into the discussion, new ideas for bills, etc that the same old crew who have been in the assembly for years may have exhausted their supply of. I agree that this is at its heart an election game and potentionally causing non-competitive elections is a potential a downside, but I believe in this case it does more to exclude new members from becoming active than it does to generate interest in the election. I also think that even if it means you have one extra inactive assemblyman, having more people means each inactive assemblyman does less to shipwreck the game.

-I don't really see the point of having a Lt. Governor who is the assemblyman that receives the most 1st preferences. Due to the quirky way Mideast Assembly elections are counted, the candidate with the most 1st preferences is often a weaker candidate an organized drive is trying to help out or a political outsider relying only on 1st preferences. I also don't see the point of having a Lt. Governor who is actually an Assemblyman just for the point of having a Lt. Governor.

That's my 2¢.

Edit: Interpret that first part as me wanting to join as a non-party member.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm fine with the assembly voting system in general; I just think that if we're going to have a separate office of Lt. Governor it should be based on someone actually running for that office and not who gets the most assembly 1st preferences.