Which of these parties would you vote for?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Assuming you're living in my Minnesota when it's a breakaway Republic ran by me

United People's Revolutionary Front - The ruling party which controls more than 70% of the Parlimentary seats and the executive branch. It bears the name of the guerilla group which won Minnesota's independence. It is a left wing party which so far has outlawed Wal-Mart and seized all its assets without compensation, legalized drugs and prostitution (though under heavy regulation), also legalized gay marriage, banned fashion magazines which promote an unhealthy image, socialized most industry and universalized health care, and hatched a plan designed to eliminate Twin Cities suburbia and turn the entire metro area into one giant urban center. It also is in favor of Minnesotan independence even if the military regime of the United States falls. Its complete dominance is largely because the people view it as protectors from the current US regime, and support for opposition parties are in areas dominated by opposing guerilla groups and US sympathizers which call for election boycotts or try to sabatoge them. It usually receives over 90% of the vote in various northeastern areas and inner metro area.

New Democratic Party - a left of center party based on the old DFL party of Minnesota during the democratic United States. It supports universal health care but not with government involvement as it has now, supports business regulation but opposed the Wal-Mart ban, and is generally socially liberal. It is largely popular in the northeastern part of the state and the 2nd layer of the metro area. It won the elections in Duluth last election, narrowly beating the UPRF however. It supports reunification with the US if democracy is restored.

People's Labor Party - a breakaway faction of the UPRF, the PLP fought with the UPRF during the guerilla war. However, it claims the UPRF has not gone far enough, and wants to create a true Marxist state. Outside of a few inner metro parts and college areas, its support is virtually nonexistant, as many activists of it have boycotted elecitons. naturally it opposes reunification with the US under all circumstances.

Christian Union - a mostly populist party which agrees with the NDP on economic issues, but opposes the social agenda of both it and the UPRF, while it did support the fashion magazine restrictions. It is fairly popular in western Minnesota, but turnout in these areas tends to be low. It generally supports reunification, although there are many prominent opponents in it.

Liberal Party of Minnesota - Using the term liberal in its classical definition, the Liberal Party is a pro-business party which was staunchly opposed to the Wal-Mart ban and seizure, and very opposed to the economic agenda of the UPRF. It is generally neural on social issues although few members have protested the UPRF's social agenda. It supports a massive scaling down of the welfare state and end of the new Metro Plan. Free market reforms it claims are the best way to solve Minnesota's war torn problems. it conditionally supports reunification. It is extremely popular in the outer layer of the metro, but its suppport is spreading thinner in that area, yet wider due to the desuburbanization.

Democratic Front - the political wing of the Minnesota Liberation Army, a far right group waging a guerilla campaign to topple the Minnesotan government. The MLA's is mostly backed by corporate interests, especially Wal Mart, and is mostly made up of anti-government extreme libertarians of the Timothy McVeigh mold, John Birchers, and neo-Nazi sympathizers. It's support is mostly in the west in heavily MLA held areas, and often receives over 90% of the vote in certain precincts, which is believed because the MLA uses its presence there to intimidate voters who might vote for other parties. A ban on it has been considered, but the government so far has claimed doing so will simply increase MLA support and should not be considered unless the situation gets too dire. However, the UPRF refuses to enter into discussion in it with parliment, and generally refuses any of its proposals.

[Rob]

The Liberal Party. Interesting scenario, BTW.

[Ebowed]

The Liberal Party; Christian Union sounds ok too.

UPRF sounds kinda contradictory if it legalizes prostitution but bans 'bad' fashion magazines.

[opebo]

I vote New Democratic Party:  sounds like what the American Democratic Party used to be.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Liberal Party; Christian Union sounds ok too.

UPRF sounds kinda contradictory if it legalizes prostitution but bans 'bad' fashion magazines.

If people want to pay for sex or screw for money, let them. There's no point keeping it illegal when that just increases the problem, through legalization and regulation we can end pimping and abuses and the spread of STDs.

On the other hand, there's no reason to let the fashion industry continue to glorify anorexia and bulemia.

[Akno21]

New Dems

[Colin]

I would probably be closest to the Liberal Party but I would probably vote for the Democratic Front: a) Because I would want to piss you off, b) Your Republic of Minnesota sucks and c) A government like that needs to be toppled.

EDIT: You also say that the Democratic Front intimidates voters but the United People's Revolutionary Front, which you says wins around 70% of the vote, wins fairly? I have never seen a country where a single party wins over 70% of the vote all the time and is a fair Democratic state. Those are pretty much Singapore-esque numbers. And don't say that, "Oh well Utah must be corrupt and un-democratic too because they always vote over 70% Republican," since alot of times statewide, and congretional elections are close, must I remind you that even heavily Republican Utah has a Democratic Congressman, and Wyoming has a Democratic Governor.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So presumabely you'd take up arms and join the insurgency instead of voting huh?

[Colin]

So presumabely you'd take up arms and join the insurgency instead of voting huh?

Oh I'd vote because I would want to get you out of power by any means necessary. I also have to say that I hope you never get elected to any position of power and that I'm glad I don't live in Minnesota.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

well you better hope I don't decide to ever run for political office because I could EASILY get elected in Minneapolis.

[Colin]

well you better hope I don't decide to ever run for political office because I could EASILY get elected in Minneapolis.

And Adolph Hitler got EASILY elected in Germany too. Does that say that just because you can get elected means that you are a good person with exceptable views?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, because if more people shared my views the world would be a much better place. And see Godwin's Law.

[John Dibble]

Out of those, the Liberal Party sounds ideal, at least for the situation. I'd be part of the libertarian wing of that party.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He said 70% of seats. Not 70% of votes.

[Colin]

He said 70% of seats. Not 70% of votes.

Even more conducive to fraud by the majority party. I would point to a few real world examples of majority parties winning 70+% of the seats in their parliament:

http://www.electionworld.org/singapore.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/azerbaijan.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/belarus.htm- President Elected with 70+% of the vote
http://www.electionworld.org/cameroon.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/chad.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/egypt.htm

That is just a small sampling. Most of them do not have Freedom House ratings, in either poltical rights or civil rights, less than four.

[Jake]

Democratic Front for sure

[True Democrat]

New Democratic Party

[nclib]

New Democratic Party.

[Bono]

Democratic Front.

[TheWildCard]

The Liberal Party!

[opebo]

The New Democratic Party is going to be the key to forming a coalition goverment - will they choose to ally with the UPRF or the Liberals?  Either way a humane result!

Or is this not a parliamentary system?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

yeah, it's a parlimentary system, but the UPRF dominates the government.

You'd like it though since the UPRF supports prostitution legalization.

[opebo]

yeah, it's a parlimentary system, but the UPRF dominates the government.

You'd like it though since the UPRF supports prostitution legalization.

Right, I know - I'd be happy with the UPRF, the New Democrats, or the Liberals. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He said 70% of seats. Not 70% of votes.

Even more conducive to fraud by the majority party. I would point to a few real world examples of majority parties winning 70+% of the seats in their parliament:

http://www.electionworld.org/singapore.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/azerbaijan.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/belarus.htm- President Elected with 70+% of the vote
http://www.electionworld.org/cameroon.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/chad.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/egypt.htm

That is just a small sampling. Most of them do not have Freedom House ratings, in either poltical rights or civil rights, less than four.

True enough but if (say) the North East region of England were to break away, based on who holds the Westminster seats at the moment, something like 90% would be held by one party.

[Erc]

He said 70% of seats. Not 70% of votes.

Even more conducive to fraud by the majority party. I would point to a few real world examples of majority parties winning 70+% of the seats in their parliament:

http://www.electionworld.org/singapore.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/azerbaijan.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/belarus.htm- President Elected with 70+% of the vote
http://www.electionworld.org/cameroon.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/chad.htm
http://www.electionworld.org/egypt.htm

That is just a small sampling. Most of them do not have Freedom House ratings, in either poltical rights or civil rights, less than four.

True enough but if (say) the North East region of England were to break away, based on who holds the Westminster seats at the moment, something like 90% would be held by one party.

Well, parties do tend to (in the long run) adjust themselves to the countries they're in (on the national level).  If you imposed the US Party system on the UK, the Democrats would always win...to a point where either the Republicans would move left or the Democratic party would fracture.

You can even see this on the local level, on occasion...Phil Bredesen (D-TN) is probably more conservative than Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA).

So, if the Northeast were to split off, Labour would have the immediate advantage...but I doubt Labour could actually keep itself intact for that long without external threats.