Labor Party Standing Committee thread: Endorsement voting

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Voted for Barnes as #1 and Wash as #2.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

As the American here, I feel that there should be one larger school with access to all three programs; everyone should know some principles of science, history, etc., but extra emphasis can be put on career pursuits. In addition, it improves socialization between the smarts and the dumbs; though we may feel better at home with our intellectual equals, we need to learn to cope with those different from us (trust me, I find it rather awkward to talk to the "average person").

I'm not saying I like the American system; it needs change and greater flexibility (and those goddamn standardized tests...GOD I hate those), but I feel there should only be a very broad "primary" school. Plus, there are people who may excel in one subject but be mediocre in another. It seems unfair to deny them the chance to take, say, a normal math class and an AP history class.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I don't think we should take outright different paths to other schools; that seems too rigid.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

75% might be a little much for a top rate.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

99% probably means that they will have a harder time keeping up with, say, owning a large corporation. I'd support a top rate of closer to 60-70%.

Also, is it worth talking about tariffs? I'd be fine with a very small tariff (a couple cents) for revenue (so as not to harm the consumer), and use of protective tariffs for countries which clearly exploit their workers and have no regard for environmental safety. No pain, no change.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

We're not pro-business, but I think that, to some extent, massive success can be especially rewarded. Though I certainly see a problem with the income disparity between the CEO and a typical employee, if that CEO is genuinely making most of their money from income and not stocks, I think we can afford to have at least a few billionaires. After all, this party advocates the reform of capitalism, not the end of it.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

<30K 0%
30K-60K, 10%
60K-120K: 15%
120K-200K: 20%
200K-500K: 30%
500K-1M: 45%
1M-10M: 55%
10M-100M: 60%
100M-1B: 70%
>1B: 75%

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I may run for an at-large Senate seat.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Let's support Ron Paul in the next presidential election.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I accept the nomination.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

We should not ally with treason against a democratic nation.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

If you win, I'll make sure that the Senate keeps you in check.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I do, but I feel that we should focus on solving problems through conventional means.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Who should I contact?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I am running for President on a left-wing but anti-Tweed platform. Do I have allies?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I wish to return to my spot as Vice Chair.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

We really don't need a candidate--most of us are already split between Napoleon and Tweed.

Also, I may be on a ticket, but not necessarily on the top.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I hereby ask my party for its support.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I think most Labor members like Napoleon but would prefer an alternative to neoliberalism.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Of course it is. But this is politics.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I would support a vote soon.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

In theory Labor party should disband if we don't get 75% support for our own candidate, since we are really doing nothing productive.

Like how the Liberal Party got 0% in the last Senate election? Again, I fail to understand your desire for hyperpartisanship for the sake of hyperpartisanship. What happened to Atlasia first?

Liberal party failed to nominate a single candidate. Look what happened to their turnout. same thing will happen to the Labor party if we can't shore up the support for our candidate. Our parties are doing a disservice to people sharing their ideologies, and we would *gasp* lose another election to right-wingers. It would be better for Tweed to form a radical left party and take the dissatisfied Labor members and have the rest of Labor go into the Liberal party if the Labor doesn't want to support it's own candidate.

Would you seriously prefer President Clarence to President Napoleon?

I personally am intending to vote for Napoleon because a) he has the best chance at winning and b) Snowstalker's crazy post-election rant kinda turned me off to the idea of him running in elections, frankly.

I respect the fact that we want the most left-wing candidate possible (excluding people like Tweed and such), but infighting like this is going to tear down the Atlasian left. We have the same ideas; it's the Whigs who are our enemies.

Yeah, the rant was dumb and I was angry. I again apologize for being an asshole that night.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I suggest you endorse either Napoleon or Oakvale. Tweed is too radical.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Napoleon

[X]Yes []No

Young Tweed
[]Yes [X]No

Oakvale
[X]Yes []No

Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):

[1]Napoleon
[3]20RP12
[2]Oakvale

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Um, if there's uncertainty, I'd like a vote on Vice Chair (which I will be running for) .