Sawx for Governor - Our Northeast (Victory Speech)

[free my dawg]

Prescott Park, Portsmouth, NH - 2014

Unfortunately, it seems like the Talleyrand era seems to be reaching its zenith, and we must decide who will ring in the newest era of the Northeast. I am running, obviously, because I see a clear difference between myself and my counterpart, CJO Barnes. Do not get me wrong – I have no personal disagreements with him, and off the battlefield. However, I am very troubled by his recent openness to bicameralism and consolidation. I had grown open to them originally, but was undecided by the time they came to the table to be voted upon (which I note is my only missed vote in my tenure as an Assemblyman). However, now that I have weighed each option, I have realized the truth: that both of these proposals will change the Northeast fundamentally as we know it, and I am firmly against each.

Since I gained an interest in politics, I noticed that the Northeast has had three main values: equality, liberty, and community. Bicameralism would simply be a naked power grab by the federal government that would destroy our region. Consolidation adds a large chunk of the big government Mideast into our region. Now, of course, I have nothing against our more conservative neighbors, but these people have a completely different vision for Atlasia than we do – while we believe that government should protect us from our inside threats, most of the Mideast believes that the government should protect us from ourselves. That is, that the government should be able to choose how you live and how you act. For example, their two Senators are trying to force an amendment taking away our regional power to dictate marriage laws. In addition, we would be taking in the region that elected a firebrand who personally attacked one of my dear friends, former VP Windjammer, to the governorship. Let them build themselves back up – they can do it without our help.

As for an alternative, I'd like to float out my personal plan – bring back five districts for Senate elections in addition to the regional Senators. Each will be led up to a redistricting commission of three Atlasians - one Laborite, one Federalist, and one third party or independent candidate, each appointed by the President, and will independently draw fair districts based on aesthetics and population. This solves the At-Large Senate problem while preserving the original structure of Atlasia as it was meant to be.

CJO Barnes, of course, is running on continuing the progress that our great Governor Talleyrand has made. However, I simply cannot see how continuing our fight for progress is possible when we are taking in the heartland of big government conservatism. He calls the death of bicameralism “rather sad”, and is firmly allied with the main figures pushing the big-government takeover of our region. If elected governor, I promise you that I will preserve our Northeast, and our ideals of equality, liberty, and community. I won't let party bosses decide who the best candidate for us is, and I surely won't let Senators Cassius and JCL dictate how we live our lives. Whether you root for the Red Sox or Yankees, the Bruins or Canadiens, or the Giants or Eagles, we are all united under one banner. One region. One Northeast.

This is our f***ing region. And I won't let anybody dictate our freedom.

We Are The World by Lil B plays in the background as Assemblyman Sawx walks off to cheers from a roaring crowd of his adoring supporters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Oakvale]

Endorsed x1000, obviously.

[rpryor03]

Endorsed wholeheartedly.

[Maxwell]

Endorsed, but just because your campaign song is Lil B.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Welcome to The Party, Sawx!

[free my dawg]

Thank you all for the endorsements and best wishes. Expect a few speeches some time in the next few days.

[Fritz]

Welcome to The Party, Sawx!

It seems odd that you would welcome someone to a party that you don't belong to....

[free my dawg]

MetLife Stadium – East Rutherford, NJ

First of all, I would like to give my thanks to Barnes for his welcome to the race. I look forward to our jousting matches as well. I'd also like to thank the Giants and Jets for welcoming me to their home – I can't remember the last time a Patriots fan got this warm of a reception.

Second of all, I have released a quote from one of Barnes' official press releases on bicameralism that proves that my quote was factually correct. He literally said that the death of bicameralism was rather sad, and no amount of doublespeak can take back what my opponent really feels about it. It is fairly obvious that bicameralism would be a federal takeover of regional rights, and I see it as beyond unacceptable. The beauty of the Atlasian system is that if we want a law passed, and we want to see if it is a good idea, we can simply test it out in one of our five regions. If our test run fails, then the plan is repealed and dies. If it succeeds, then other regions, or even the federal government, can expand it so the entire country can prosper. Taking that away would destroy that potential that we have.

As for that specific issue, I'd like to point out Barnes' party's support of the Ratification Process Alteration Resolution, which, in simpler terms, would allow state assemblies to ratify constitutional amendments by a simple majority vote. I had to mull over time to think about it, but this simply seems like a terrible idea. While Senator Deus raises very valid concerns about taking power from the people and putting it in the hands of politicians, I believe that the RPAR is a scheme to revive the dead idea of bicameralism and take away our rights. Electing Barnes to the governor's mansion would leave him as the last line of defense between the people and an overreaching government, and considering he supports this issue, keeping him in charge would be dangerous.

But as Barnes requested, I will outline my issues. Personally, I believe that we do not need a constitutional convention – in fact, I consider it yet another scheme for Labor to circumvent the rules and subvert the will of our people. My opponent even said that the Northeast was the most active region, and because of that, we should keep our current constitution instead of scrapping the entire thing. Instead of destabilizing the system completely, I will work with the Northeast Assembly and consult with my constituents to see how parts of the constitution can be changed to be better for the Northeast. For example, I helped pass Governor Talleyrand's bill to stop the torrent of weekly special elections that impede the flow of actual government and help reduce the turnover problem our region had. I will continue to work with the Assembly to enhance our current constitution rather than start fresh.

As for housing, I believe that housing the poor is a very noble cause, and that we should end homelessness. The group that I want to focus on first, however, is Atlasia's veterans. They have risked life and limb to preserve our freedom, and they deserve better than being abandoned by our country. I would sponsor a bill for free housing for our veterans, administered by our Veterans' Affairs program. Also, should a veteran want to further their education, I support their fully subsidized college education, and I would support a job training program if they wanted to go in that field. The men and women who fought for our country deserve to fight – it's time to give them a fighting chance.

In conclusion, it is clear why my opponent is engaging in attacks against me instead of debating the issue. While I have created a specific alternative to help bring back true, meaningful reform while preserving our region's ideals of freedom, CJO Barnes continues to try and resuscitate a plan that he admits is dead. While I have shown my willingness to go against Labor in the past and was punished for it, Barnes' only plan is to game the system so he can help pass a government takeover of our Northeast. So to answer your question, Barnes – why am I running? I'm running because I want to serve the people. You're running because you want to serve your party.

Thank you and good night.

[Simfan34]

Endorsed. It's clear that you'll be a clear and loud voice against the insanity that seems to have gripped much of this country, and clearer and louder than I think most would have expected. I am truly impressed by the forcefulness of your vision and your grasp of what has been happening as of late. I mean, I knew you were quite sharp to begin with but just not this sharp. It really is quite remarkable; the Northeast will be in good hands with you in charge.

I just should be thankful I'm not running against you, I'd be doomed. Bravo, just... bravo.

[Adam Griffin]

Second of all, I have released a quote from one of Barnes' official press releases on bicameralism that proves that my quote was factually correct. He literally said that the death of bicameralism was rather sad, and no amount of doublespeak can take back what my opponent really feels about it. It is fairly obvious that bicameralism would be a federal takeover of regional rights, and I see it as beyond unacceptable. The beauty of the Atlasian system is that if we want a law passed, and we want to see if it is a good idea, we can simply test it out in one of our five regions. If our test run fails, then the plan is repealed and dies. If it succeeds, then other regions, or even the federal government, can expand it so the entire country can prosper. Taking that away would destroy that potential that we have.

Running a campaign that hedges its fortunes on an essentially 50/50 issue is not smart, especially when it's essentially the only non-copycat stance taken thus far. No wonder the Real People didn't endorse you. Also, in the doomsday scenario you seem to think would manifest, you easily forget that three regions would still exist.

As for that specific issue, I'd like to point out Barnes' party's support of the Ratification Process Alteration Resolution, which, in simpler terms, would allow state assemblies to ratify constitutional amendments by a simple majority vote. I had to mull over time to think about it, but this simply seems like a terrible idea. While Senator Deus raises very valid concerns about taking power from the people and putting it in the hands of politicians, I believe that the RPAR is a scheme to revive the dead idea of bicameralism and take away our rights. Electing Barnes to the governor's mansion would leave him as the last line of defense between the people and an overreaching government, and considering he supports this issue, keeping him in charge would be dangerous.

You should check out the 17th Amendment. Executives can't veto an amendment ratified by a region by popular vote, and the powers allocated in the 17th Amendment do not treat either of the potential methods of ratification (popular vote or legislature) differently. The executives of each region have no power based on the wording of the 17th to sign or veto either a change in the method of ratification, or individual amendments themselves.

But as Barnes requested, I will outline my issues. Personally, I believe that we do not need a constitutional convention – in fact, I consider it yet another scheme for Labor to circumvent the rules and subvert the will of our people. My opponent even said that the Northeast was the most active region, and because of that, we should keep our current constitution instead of scrapping the entire thing.

He probably requested that because everything thus far from this campaign has either been a knee-jerk reaction to CJO Barnes' stances on issues, or discussion on issues that Barnes already has articulated. Where's the originality? Also, considering a constitutionally-defined procedure for cleaning up inconsistencies, duplicities and other shortcomings in our governing documents is a scheme? Do you personally intend to go through the entire Constitution, locate each potential flaw and address them one at a time? I can flatly tell you that will never happen.

As for housing, I believe that housing the poor is a very noble cause, and that we should end homelessness. The group that I want to focus on first, however, is Atlasia's veterans. They have risked life and limb to preserve our freedom, and they deserve better than being abandoned by our country. I would sponsor a bill for free housing for our veterans, administered by our Veterans' Affairs program. Also, should a veteran want to further their education, I support their fully subsidized college education, and I would support a job training program if they wanted to go in that field. The men and women who fought for our country deserve to fight – it's time to give them a fighting chance.

Which is why the Labor Party was ecstatic after Bore's Northeast Anti-Homelessness Act went into effect. It not only ensures that no one has to sleep on the streets, but it significantly reduces the cost to taxpayers associated with incarceration and emergency care (and of course, helps these individuals avoid said fates). I'm curious as to where you would get the money to support such a boondoggle of giving literally every single veteran a free home, especially when the potentially justified cost savings have already been addressed. You're talking about potentially tens of billions of dollars here.

In conclusion, it is clear why my opponent is engaging in attacks against me instead of debating the issue. While I have created a specific alternative to help bring back true, meaningful reform while preserving our region's ideals of freedom, CJO Barnes continues to try and resuscitate a plan that he admits is dead. While I have shown my willingness to go against Labor in the past and was punished for it, Barnes' only plan is to game the system so he can help pass a government takeover of our Northeast. So to answer your question, Barnes – why am I running? I'm running because I want to serve the pPeople's Party. You're running because you want to serve your party.

There's not much to attack thus far, and frankly, Barnes has been far more committing to discussing policy in so much as I see it. You also were literally never punished for going against Labor, not only because there is no enforcement mechanism in a voluntary game for such measures, but also because you've never actually even engaged in the game until just a couple of days ago - good politics, though. You shouldn't be upset that you came out swinging and are now going to face criticism for your poorly-thought-out proposals, empty rhetoric and essential campaign slogan of "boo Labor", which is of course why I'm here.

[Lumine]

Endorsed. Some differences aside I believe you could make a great Governor for the Northeast, so best of luck!

[Talleyrand]

I'm not sure why exactly this campaign seems to be running on, but it seems like there are several defining factors.

1. Labor betrayed me??? This has been dismissed multiple times again.

2. Barnes has a secret agenda of bicameralism? Yes, he supported it, as did the founder of the party you currently belong to, but has acknowledged that it is not a viable prospect anymore. It's also odd that you supported consolidation and had indicated that to several people, yet now suddenly you've switched support wholeheartedly to a plan that's TPP-friendly as soon as you've switched parties. That's fine, but the sanctimonious stuff about Labor shenanigans isn't adding up.

3. Your only major view on an issue has been support of an anti-homelessness initiative, but this totally ignores the fact that such a bill was introduced and passed in the Assembly last session by a Labor member and with Labor support.

[Mechaman]

I'm not sure why exactly this campaign seems to be running on, but it seems like there are several defining factors.

1. Labor betrayed me??? This has been dismissed multiple times again.

2. Barnes has a secret agenda of bicameralism? Yes, he supported it, as did the founder of the party you currently belong to, but has acknowledged that it is not a viable prospect anymore. It's also odd that you supported consolidation and had indicated that to several people, yet now suddenly you've switched support wholeheartedly to a plan that's TPP-friendly as soon as you've switched parties. That's fine, but the sanctimonious stuff about Labor shenanigans isn't adding up.

3. Your only major view on an issue has been support of an anti-homelessness initiative, but this totally ignores the fact that such a bill was introduced and passed in the Assembly last session by a Labor member and with Labor support.

Ugh god, you know I hate to say it man, but Talleyrand made some really major points here.

Please don't take this personally sawx, but I'm withdrawing my endorsement.

I'm sorry.  I love you (in a non-gay way).

-Mechaman
Workingman's Paper Editor

[free my dawg]

Alright. I'm a little pressed for time because RL issues, but I can at least make some rudimentary response.

1. I have proof that multiple Labor officials (including you) would have supported my candidacy had I ran, and that it was floated to Labor's higher ups (and well-supported, seemingly until Barnes got in).

2. Do you have proof of this? I originally said I was undecided, but I never said I was a sure thing.

3. Then let's have a debate or two, considering the people seem to clamor for one now.

[Sopranos Republican]

If I didn't mention already, ENDORSED!

[free my dawg]

It's quite unsurprising that Barnes' biggest backer decided to take a direct response to me. I'm quite flattered by it – especially considering it took just two days for my opponent to bring out his biggest endorser, and four to receive an article in The Atlasian Laborinth. Of course, this article is very untrue – I actually introduced the FitzGerald-Grehan Act, which legalized the right to privacy in peoples' vehicles after Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald was cruelly accosted by a rogue man and a rogue police force. Labor continues to follow the policy that if they repeat this lie enough, it will become true – which I will not allow.

Let's start off with the Seventeenth Amendment. This, of course, allows anyone to indefinitely vote on any amendment, whether alive or dead. With the RPAR, any amendment – not just bicameralism or consolidation - will take a simple majority vote by the Assembly, and bypass the governor directly. That is, if Labor passes the RPAR, and they get a simple majority in the Senate and three regional governments, they can pass their agenda. And with their optimal plan of three regions, the amount of regions they need a majority in to pass their agenda reduces to two. Never mind that I would have voted against this because of my concerns about bicameralism, and that I never made a concrete assumption about it – consolidation is a plot for Labor to advance their agenda without any checks on the people.

Onto his other accusations. Curiously, Adam Griffin is trying to say that this funny little thing called the IRC made a plot to destroy Labor. Well, let me tell my side of the story. There was a man who wanted to run for governor of the Northeast. He floated it to a few high-ranking Laborites, and they liked it. But when a personal friend of Griffin's went rogue and ran anyway, all of Labor decided to line up in his corner – even the people who promised to endorse their original candidate. And this happened ever-so-coincidentally, two days after the consolidation vote left. If you couldn't figure it out, that candidate who wanted to run before Barnes was me. Griffin says that it was simply Barnes saying that he wanted to run and be governor, but let me ask you all something. Is it really that much of a coincidence that two days after the vote on Labor's highest priority didn't go their way, they decided to go with another candidate? Who to know that the Labor Party is doing an active purge of its members – including a former president and a sitting Senator – than someone who was part of that purge? Who to know the inner dealings of the party better than an ex-Labor castoff?

Let me tell you something, Griffin. No amount of lies, conspiracy theories, or ad hominems from Barnes or his surrogates can stop this train. You may have destroyed my future with Labor, but passing me over only made my resolve stronger. I didn't leave because of any external factors – I left because I learned the Labor Party cannot be trusted under any circumstances. This month, Labor betrayed me. Next month, if Barnes wins, it will be you, me, and the entire Northeast feeling Adam Griffin's cold knife in their back. Don't make the same mistake that I did, when I was foolish and naive. Don't trust Labor.

[SWE]

1. I have proof that multiple Labor officials (including you) would have supported my candidacy had I ran, and that it was floated to Labor's higher ups (and well-supported, seemingly until Barnes got in).

There was nothing stopping you from contesting the primary

[free my dawg]

I'm actually firmly against bicameralism (and Labor's cult-ish obsession with it), and have been for a while. I mean my sources say that Griffin knew about my run and that the day after the RPAR failed (mind you because I was pissed about bicameralism), he gave Barnes the okay to run a campaign of his own... but that can't be a coincidence, can it?

[windjammer]

The fitzgerald law: HAHAHAHA.


Will I have a law too if you re elected?

[Simfan34]

Bicameralism is nice in theory, but the main proponents of the idea and the apparent design of the scheme make me extremely leery, to say the least. The most similar example that comes to mind is reforming the admissions system to selective New York City public schools to include more than a test- it's a good idea in the abstract, but the motivations of the people pushing for it cause one to resist the change.

[Adam Griffin]

I'm actually firmly against bicameralism (and Labor's cult-ish obsession with it), and have been for a while. I mean my sources say that Griffin knew about my run and that the day after the RPAR failed (mind you because I was pissed about bicameralism), he gave Barnes the okay to run a campaign of his own... but that can't be a coincidence, can it?

That's complete and utter bullsh!t, and you know it. You never once mentioned a run to me, and I never heard about it from anyone else. If you assumed that someone else would convey to me your intents, then that's your own damn fault.

[Adam Griffin]

Shared with permission:

Just to let you know, I'm preparing a run for Governor of the Northeast if no other candidate declares on Saturday.  Talleyrand has obviously confirmed with me that he won't be running for reelection, and neither of us have been able to ascertain a declaration from any other prospective candidate.

More to follow.

[free my dawg]

As for Sawx, I understand he wanted to run for Governor, but his switch to TPP seems odd.

I actually had a conversation with Talleyrand regarding a run for governor. In fact, before I even mentioned it, he said that I should run, and I expressed my interest to him. Might as well take his advice.

[Talleyrand]

As for Sawx, I understand he wanted to run for Governor, but his switch to TPP seems odd.

I actually had a conversation with Talleyrand regarding a run for governor. In fact, before I even mentioned it, he said that I should run, and I expressed my interest to him. Might as well take his advice.

This is true- by my calculations this was two to three weeks ago, but I didn't mention it to anyone else to my recollection. Nor did I endorse Barnes when he declared. You had the option to run in the primary, but chose not to, so all the betrayal nonsense is ludicrous.

Also, this "bicameralism" fear mongering is the biggest joke I've ever seen. It should be noted the proposal's strongest proponent and creator is former President Duke, a member of TPP, and it passed with the support of both members of the presidential ticket that TPP is likely to endorse. There were a number of people in Labor who either opposed or only supported it because they felt it was the only plausible way to get consolidation passed, including myself. If you think Labor has a "cult-like" obsession with it, you really should start paying more attention to the game.

In no way whatsoever are you a victim of the Labor party or Adam Griffin, and repeating patently false claims of "betrayal" isn't going to make that any more true.

[free my dawg]

I'm not denying that - nor do I consider you one of the traitors I mentioned. The actual traitors know who they are - and they surely aren't you. I'm just saying, I have my sources that back what I said - that is, Griffin knew of my candidacy before Barnes took place, and that Griffin seems to be the one taking the mantle from Duke.

As I've said before, I'd like to expand on the other solutions I have for the Northeast in a debate with my opponent, and invite him to join me in selecting a moderator.