Whig Party Convention, Bird-in-Hand, PA

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I agree... I also believe we ought to have new language for filling vacancies...the no confidence vote on Vice Chairman Vacancy seems a bit cuckoo!

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I'd like to add one more plank...

In the event of a vacancy in the office of Vice Chairman, the Chairman shall begin an election to fill the post within three days

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I vote AYE

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I'm neutral on Supersonic's suggestion.

Either way, he opens up an interesting door... I wouldn't mind having a bit of a discussion on our military-related positions. As it stands, the other parties seem woefully prepared to lead our country to defeat if Atlasia was ever threatened or attacked.

I believe that is taking things too far.... I have faith that even those furthest left would support a military response if we are directly threatend and certainly if we are attacked. However- I agree fully that their policies make the world more dangerous for our nation and would be open to new language in our platform which distinguishes our foreign policy views from theirs

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Non-Whig Endorsement Ballot. 48 Hours. Aye, Nay or Abstain

Franzl AYE

NVTownsend AYE

BaconKing AYE

Seatown NAY
 
Snowstalker AYE

Marokai Blue NAY
 
Xahar NAY

Hashemite NAY

AndrewTX AYE

SJoyceFla AYE

[CLARENCE 2015!]

With regards to the issue raised by Snowstalker...

I believe in voting for candidates by his or her merit, not by his or her party. Snowstalker, you will definitely be on my preference list because I believe you merit election to Senate- but I will not place some one such as Seatown who has been very hostile and unparliamentary in the Senate over some one such as Franzl or Bacon King- who would be pleasures to serve with- due to partisan dealmaking. I understand your concerns about the Labor Party's identity and echo ZuWo's comments in that regard, and I believe the Lbor Party has shining members such as you and Redalgo. However, I do not believe an official deal along these lines is the way to go for this election with this slate of candidates....

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I always support cooperation with the Bloc...I want to point out that I am a Whig, not Imperial Bloc- so I don't understand the "Clarence Clause" ;-)

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I'd like to reiterate the importance of backing ZuWo who has selflessly put forward efforts every election to get us all elected... his opponent is a nice fella but even he admits ZuWo has done a fine job, something also shown in his approval ratings. Go, ZuWo!

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Great to see our membership growing!

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Thanks, Supersonic but let's make the vote a bit more official...

I will give 24 hours for the vote of no confidence in Chairman Simfan. I do this with regret- he is a good man but he has simply been inactive...

Please vote Aye or Nay on the motion of no confidence in Chairman Simfan

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Aye

[CLARENCE 2015!]

With a vote of 6-1, the vote of no confidence has passed and Simfan has been removed as Chairman. We hope that he will be able to return to the board and the party very soon...

As I was Vice Chairman and have now assumed the role of Chairman- I will open up a nomination period for the office of Vice Chairman. There will be 24 hours for nominations and then we will proceed to a vote

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I thank the nominees- Supersonic and 20RP12... I know either will make a fine Vice Chairman. With that, the nomination period is now closed...24 hours for a vote

Vice Chairman
-Supersonic
-20RP12


I abstain as Chairman

[CLARENCE 2015!]

This vote is still going on...

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Unfortunately ZuWo and Cathcon got here after the voting had expired...I will expand voting time in the future if people feel it is too short

By a vote of 5 to 3, Supersonic is the new Whig Party Vice Chairman- congratulations!

[CLARENCE 2015!]

While I appreciate the sentiment, I believe it is too black and white... for example this would exclude my school choice bills

I vote NAY

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I urge all party members to vote NAY on this.....we cooperate with the Bloc and since this proposal was announced, both the Bloc and our own party have realized there are better ways to cooperate

NAY

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Alright...let's move on to that vote after we are done with the vote on the union

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Thanks, Hagrid...

I will now allow per ZuWo's request for 48 hours for candidates for the Mideast Assembly to come before us to request our endorsement... Whig candidates are already endorsed so this goes for non-Whigs

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I have a few questions:

1. How many assemblymen will  be elected?
2. How many people are running?
3. How many of them are Whigs?

I'm asking these questions because I think we shouldn't endorse more people than the amount that can be elected can be elected.

ZuWo- can you please enlighten us?

SPC- your request has been noted and I'd like to announce my support for your endorsement to my fellow Whigs

[CLARENCE 2015!]

For the record, I support SPC's candidacy as well.

While Gass means well to ask us to back his candidacy, it's the real life equivalent of Bernie Sanders asking for a Republican endorsement. Not 'appnin.

I totally understand this view. My goal for asking was primarily to introduce myself to your party members, make it known that I will be willing to work across the aisle and ask for at least some consideration.

Thank you- I respect this and I believe all Whigs do... we look forward to working with you. Also, we will not simply reject your request for consideration. We will have an endorsement vote between you and SPC.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Also, is the Whig Liberty Caucus affiliated to the 'official' Whig party? It's acting as a party within a party.

It purports to be. I don't really have a problem with it, but it might be good to clarify the powers of subsidiary caucuses in our rules. Their ability to endorse a candidate isn't really official (a caucus endorsement would not appear on a presidential ballot), so I'd look into specifying that our caucuses would be able to make recommendations for endorsements. Kind of like how senate committees recommend whether or not legislation should be passed.

Hmm. Yes, some guidelines do need to be laid down because at the moment the Whig Liberty Caucus might as well be its own political party, not to mention they are most likely to endorse a non-Whig in the upcoming primary.

I'm also slightly worried that the Caucus is getting more attention that the actual base party. I'd like to see what Clarence thinks of this matter.

I don't have any problem with this... if the Caucus is getting more attention then our party, that is on us to fix! I've been around here for a while now and the lesson others have taught me is that the right needs to be united... that includes hawks like myself and the libertarians. I would rather have an active libertarian caucus then a separate party- right now we are under the same big tent but the caucus gives them a chance to express their views... I am ok with this

If you both want to clarify caucus rules- that is fine by me. But let's appreciate the caucus for what it is- a group WITHIN our party of highly motivated people who we will unite with in a general election despite disagreements before

I'm all for it

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Mideast Assembly
SPC

City
Columbia, SC

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Mr. Vice Chairman- I concur. I ask for a member to move to adjourn provided we see no other business...

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Simfan- I am very glad to see that you are back. However, like Pingvin requested before and was denied- we can't simply give you the Chair position back. None of us wanted to do the vote of no confidence (I was originally hoping some one would jump in the race for Vice Chair!) but you had disappeared on us and we weren't sure when you'd return... now that you are back, I encourage you to run for party office again
I'd also advise that to serve in party office- you back our party members in the primary over members of other parties... Jbrase is a fine candidate who I will support if he wins the primary, but party offices inherently call for partisanship