The People's Convention, February and also March 2015 - Foucaulf wins primary.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:19:01 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  The People's Convention, February and also March 2015 - Foucaulf wins primary.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8
Author Topic: The People's Convention, February and also March 2015 - Foucaulf wins primary.  (Read 9576 times)
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #150 on: March 03, 2015, 04:27:26 PM »

Dkrolga
The People's Party
Massachusetts

(Just changing party, not state or region)

He joined 8 days ago, but it depends on when the election actually is. The funny thing is, Bacon King has not actually resigned yet, meaning that all these candidates are running for an election that as of now is not scheduled to take place nor has to take place. The real question is, I suppose, when does Bacon King resign and how long after that would the election be held? To the Constitution!
Sorry for the interruption,
I mean, this is obvious he hasn't resigned because his VP term hasn't started yet.
According to the constitution:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
I guess Friday 13th?
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #151 on: March 03, 2015, 04:30:39 PM »

Dkrolga
The People's Party
Massachusetts

(Just changing party, not state or region)

He joined 8 days ago, but it depends on when the election actually is. The funny thing is, Bacon King has not actually resigned yet, meaning that all these candidates are running for an election that as of now is not scheduled to take place nor has to take place. The real question is, I suppose, when does Bacon King resign and how long after that would the election be held? To the Constitution!

Well, I am a stickler for rules, so technically, Krol isn't entitled to an automatic nomination, so no suspension of rules is required. He hasn't been a member of The Party for two weeks regardless of whether this is considered a new convention or the same one.

Because of this, even if we vote no on suspending the rules, no one in the race is entitled to an automatic endorsement that has declared so far.
Logged
DKrol
dkrolga
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,542


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #152 on: March 03, 2015, 04:31:28 PM »

Should the by-laws be temporarily suspended and an open ballot for the Senate endorsement held?

[X] Yes

[] No

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today.

This election is an important one. It could give Labor its 6th seat in the Senate which, when combined with their hold of the Presidency, would give them an unprecedented hold on the government. We cannot allow Labor to win another seat.

Let me begin by answering my critics. Yes - I did just join the party a week ago. Yes - I am still new to Atlasia. Yes - I have never held elected office in Atlasia before. But I believe that those are my strengths, rather than my weaknesses. I'm new to the party and can lead it down a new path - a path focused on centrism and pragmatism. I'm new to Atlasia and I'm new to elected office, allowing me to serve in the Senate without the baggage of some of the other long term people have. I am a fresh face who can bring a new voice to the Senate and Nyman. I want to be the next At-Large Senate before I want to change the tone of Nyman. I want to change the tone in the Senate and make it a place for cooperation between parties. I believe that I am best suited to do that because I am new to Atlasian politics.

I am not to Atlas, however. My account has been registered for just over two years and I have been active since. I am better known on the Election What Ifs board, with alt. histories like General Election - 1990, Camelot Rises, and A More Perfect Union. Many people from that area of Atlas may also know me from NHI's 2004/2008 Election Games or Lumine's ASOIAF Game. I believe that my background being one not from Atlasia gives me a different, new perspective to bring to the Senate. I am also not new to GovSims. I have spent the last five years on various GovSims - ranging from the now-defunct The American Republican, the now-defunct State of the Union, and Virtual America.

I hope that you will look favorably upon my bid for the nomination.

Thank you.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #153 on: March 03, 2015, 04:33:24 PM »

Should the by-laws be temporarily suspended and an open ballot for the Senate endorsement held?

[X] Yes
[  ] No

When is the election? Depending on this it may be that neither DKrol nor Foucaulf would be eligible for automatic endorsement or it might be that they both would be. Either way, it would mean a primary is necessary. Regardless, I support one.

It might be worth amending the by-laws to allow that if a certain percentage of The Party petitions to hold a vote on an otherwise automatically endorsed candidate that such a vote would be held. The sort of farce we saw with JCL imposing himself as the Federalist candidate for President (and perhaps sealing their fate) despite a plurality of the party having voted against endorsing his candidacy must at all costs not be allowed to repeat itself in our Party.

If we want party unity the best way to ensure this is by allowing all voices to be heard before making a choice one way or another; you can even call it democratic centralism if you want! I will say this now, I pledge to vote for whoever The Party votes to nominate in this race, regardless of my own preferences, provided that we hold a vote. I would even vote for Adam Griffin, who kindly took the time to insult me in his speech as some ancillary antagonist whose presence ended got in the way of his personal alliance "with The People" (despite the fact I joined the first incarnation of The Party the day after it was founded and registered in the second before it was even re-formed, which "coincidentally" happened the day I returned), if The Party voted to endorse him. I simply ask that we hold a vote first.

Hold on SimFan. We (Federalists) don't have a provision for an open primary when it comes to the Presidential elections unlike what we do for At-Large Senate races. So my legitimacy was not a farce. Maxwell wasn't a member of the party at the time so he had no right to contest when we had a candidate. Had he joined before the election I do acknowledge he would've gotten the nod and I would've stepped aside (cause he wouldn't accept a conservative VP) but he didn't. He still got half my rightful base in addition to his DR base.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #154 on: March 03, 2015, 04:35:01 PM »

Should the by-laws be temporarily suspended and an open ballot for the Senate endorsement held?

[X] Yes

[] No

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today.

This election is an important one. It could give Labor its 6th seat in the Senate which, when combined with their hold of the Presidency, would give them an unprecedented hold on the government. We cannot allow Labor to win another seat.

Let me begin by answering my critics. Yes - I did just join the party a week ago. Yes - I am still new to Atlasia. Yes - I have never held elected office in Atlasia before. But I believe that those are my strengths, rather than my weaknesses. I'm new to the party and can lead it down a new path - a path focused on centrism and pragmatism. I'm new to Atlasia and I'm new to elected office, allowing me to serve in the Senate without the baggage of some of the other long term people have. I am a fresh face who can bring a new voice to the Senate and Nyman. I want to be the next At-Large Senate before I want to change the tone of Nyman. I want to change the tone in the Senate and make it a place for cooperation between parties. I believe that I am best suited to do that because I am new to Atlasian politics.

I am not to Atlas, however. My account has been registered for just over two years and I have been active since. I am better known on the Election What Ifs board, with alt. histories like General Election - 1990, Camelot Rises, and A More Perfect Union. Many people from that area of Atlas may also know me from NHI's 2004/2008 Election Games or Lumine's ASOIAF Game. I believe that my background being one not from Atlasia gives me a different, new perspective to bring to the Senate. I am also not new to GovSims. I have spent the last five years on various GovSims - ranging from the now-defunct The American Republican, the now-defunct State of the Union, and Virtual America.

I hope that you will look favorably upon my bid for the nomination.

Thank you.


Oh, friend! This party is led by The People! It only dances down a new path when They say dance!

But I am following your campaign closely and like what you're doing. My opposition to an open primary or not has nothing to do with you. I just don't want us to get in the habit of suspending rules.

And as I outlined earlier, I don't even think a rules suspension is necessary since no one has been a member of The Party for 14 days and thus no one is entitled to an automatic endorsement. Had you been a member for 14 days, I would support your automatic endorsement.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #155 on: March 03, 2015, 04:37:32 PM »
« Edited: March 03, 2015, 04:43:00 PM by Governor Simfan34 »

And Windjammer (what are you doing in here? Tongue) got to the Constitution before I did! I'm not entirely sure how to interpret that clause, however. Does it mean that Homely has 7 days following the creation of a vacancy to call an election, which must take place no more than 10 days after the election has been called or Homely has 7 days following the creation of a vacancy to call an election, which must take place no more than 10 days after the vacancy has been created?

The latter seems like what the text suggests but it would imply that it would be perfectly possible to call for an election that would take place, say, the next day, if the schedule worked out like that. It also depends on when BK resigns.

But it's all moot since the relevant bit of our bylaws state that "Members of The Party for at least two weeks prior to the start of the convention will automatically receive The People's Endorsement." Now, regardless of whether you want to consider this convention to have been "started" when it was reconvened on 2 March, or "started" when it was originally called into session on 6 February, neither candidate qualifies for automatic endorsement. So this vote on whether to "suspend the bylaws" seems superfluous to me.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #156 on: March 03, 2015, 04:38:02 PM »

Should the by-laws be temporarily suspended and an open ballot for the Senate endorsement held?

[ ] Yes
[X] No

I agree with the sentiments expressed by Duke and X. Were this an election for another party's seat, or were there no TPP candidate in the running, I might consider voting to endorse one of the other candidates, but such is not the case. I am extremely hesitant to hand over one of our own seats without a fight, and even more hesitant to pass over one of our own members to nominate a candidate from another party. The People's Party is after all a party, not a charitable foundation or a lobbyist firm endorsing candidates based on principles alone. If a candidate for this seat feels so strongly that they best represent the mission of this Party, they are welcome to join; but to voluntarily lend our influence to the candidate of another faction in lieu of fielding our own champion is neither sound strategy nor a service to the people who elected a TPP Senator three months ago. While I would have preferred a more experienced TPPer, Dkrolga is doing quite well for a first-time candidate and I see no reason to abandon him so that Labor can pick up a sixth seat.
Furthermore, while I appreciate Griffin's gesture and sympathize with much of what he had to say, I must admit I'm somewhat put off that Labor is pushing to take one of our seats in the Senate so soon after we helped elect their candidate to the presidency.

Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #157 on: March 03, 2015, 04:47:32 PM »

Hold on SimFan. We (Federalists) don't have a provision for an open primary when it comes to the Presidential elections unlike what we do for At-Large Senate races. So my legitimacy was not a farce. Maxwell wasn't a member of the party at the time so he had no right to contest when we had a candidate. Had he joined before the election I do acknowledge he would've gotten the nod and I would've stepped aside (cause he wouldn't accept a conservative VP) but he didn't. He still got half my rightful base in addition to his DR base.

My point was that more people voted to endorse Maxwell than they did for you. Regardless of Federalist party rules, you were able to impose your candidacy despite the clear opposition of the majority of the party members who expressed a preference by voting on whom to endorse, even if the vote was not valid. The particulars of your case are not relevant here, its the fact that it could take place at all that is.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #158 on: March 03, 2015, 04:47:43 PM »

Should the bylaws be suspending?

X  No

That's my official vote, but it's really moot because we're going to have an open primary anyway given none of the candidates meet the requirements to receive our automatic endorsement. That, and I don't want to set a precedent where we suspend The People's Bylaws whenever it suits us.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #159 on: March 03, 2015, 04:55:28 PM »

I agree with Duke in principle, we should not really be suspending The People's Bylaws whenever we are so inclined, but the fact is that I believe the Bylaws as they currently stand allow for the possibility of a situation where we are compelled to nominate a candidate in complete disregard to the wishes of the members of The Party. This is why I believe it probably would be worthwhile to amend the bylaws as I mentioned earlier:

It might be worth amending the by-laws to allow that if a certain percentage of The Party petitions to hold a vote on an otherwise automatically endorsed candidate that such a vote would be held. The sort of farce we saw with JCL imposing himself as the Federalist candidate for President (and perhaps sealing their fate) despite a plurality of the party having voted against endorsing his candidacy must at all costs not be allowed to repeat itself in our Party.

(again, JCL, it isn't really about you but the context of what happened)

That being said since we now have two members of The Party running in this race under the bylaws we would have to hold a vote anyway, so this vote is indeed moot, and with that in mind I'm changing my vote on principle.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #160 on: March 03, 2015, 04:57:54 PM »
« Edited: March 03, 2015, 05:01:00 PM by Lowly Griff »

What happens if someone only wins a plurality of the vote?

EDIT: Or duh, it's probably run-off voting.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #161 on: March 03, 2015, 05:04:07 PM »

Hold on SimFan. We (Federalists) don't have a provision for an open primary when it comes to the Presidential elections unlike what we do for At-Large Senate races. So my legitimacy was not a farce. Maxwell wasn't a member of the party at the time so he had no right to contest when we had a candidate. Had he joined before the election I do acknowledge he would've gotten the nod and I would've stepped aside (cause he wouldn't accept a conservative VP) but he didn't. He still got half my rightful base in addition to his DR base.

My point was that more people voted to endorse Maxwell than they did for you. Regardless of Federalist party rules, you were able to impose your candidacy despite the clear opposition of the majority of the party members who expressed a preference by voting on whom to endorse, even if the vote was not valid. The particulars of your case are not relevant here, its the fact that it could take place at all that is.

I agree with your point. Had the rules been different Max would've had the Feds. I ran because Max chose not to return the favor and name a Federalist as a VP (even though he was a runningmate to a Federalist).  
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #162 on: March 03, 2015, 05:04:47 PM »
« Edited: March 03, 2015, 06:14:27 PM by Governor Simfan34 »

Also I would like to echo the point made by Duke and Averroes, among others, that I find the fact that Labor is seeking to poach a seat held by their partner in the last election, without whose support they could not have won*, to be distasteful and something that should have been disavowed by Labor as a condition of our endorsement of a unity ticket. (I don't hold this against anyone, however, as it is of course something thought of in hindsight, something they did not have...)


*This is a fact, and I have done the work to prove it, which I can share if so requested.
Logged
Foucaulf
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,050
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #163 on: March 03, 2015, 05:11:41 PM »

While the party bureaucracy processes my dues and forms, I'll comment that everyone has come to a consensus very quickly. By the end of the day, The Party should just proceed to a vote on whether DKrol or I would receive endorsement, with a run-off option. If members really want to, they can write-in Adam and The Party can deal with rule complications if he somehow wins.

Every hour spent arguing over minutiae is an hour we cede to Labour in organizing voters. And we only have 271 hours to spare!
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #164 on: March 03, 2015, 05:12:15 PM »

Also I would like to echo the point made by Duke and Averroes, among others, that I find the fact that Labor is seeking to poach a seat held by their partner in the last election, without whose support they could not have won*, to be distasteful and something that should have been disavowed by Labor as a condition of our endorsement of a unity ticket. (I don't hold this against anyone, however, as it is of course something thought of in hindsight, something they did not have...)

I've remained silent about this until now, but you're forcing my hand. The only conditions of the unity ticket in regards to Senate seats that was requested was 1) TPP requesting BK be on the ticket and 2) we asked that the NE Senate seat not be contested by TPP (as it, too, was being vacated by a member of the ticket); in exchange, we'd have our unity ticket and we wouldn't contest the Governorship. Despite the fact that it was not upheld, we did not complain like you are doing now, nor buck on our other agreements...

There'd obviously need to be some arrangements made with respect to that seat. In many respects, the NE Senate seat is a more valuable commodity in my eyes for Labor than the Presidency itself.

I have much interest in holding the NE Senate seat, however - it is priority number one as far as my personal interests are concerned
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #165 on: March 03, 2015, 05:23:00 PM »

What happens if someone only wins a plurality of the vote?

EDIT: Or duh, it's probably run-off voting.

I don't know, looking at the present section it answers some concerns but raises other questions:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

On one hand, it is already possible for a "motion by three members" to trigger a "vote shall be held on whether to un-endorse any Person candidate named in the motion who is running in the upcoming election", although that's a bit different from what I had in mind. However there does not seem to be anything technically pertaining to an intra-Party primary besides this:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which, since it says only one candidate may be endorsed if there is a member of The Party running, so that would imply we have to hold a primary. I mean, I know we've obviously held primaries in the past, but the rooting for them in the bylaws seems unclear.

The main question I suppose have now is, in the case of a "primary", do we have to allow out-of-party candidacies? Wink
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #166 on: March 03, 2015, 05:23:28 PM »

Just to clarify: I don't bring this up to be petty or anything. It's just that there is continued public complaining here about a hypothetical and something that was not asked or requested, whereas we did not do so when an explicitly-requested and effectively agreed-upon arrangement was essentially tossed out the window. In addition, I found it quite disturbing that someone as qualified as Talleyrand - who is in many respect a Person himself - was scoffed at in such a way.

Furthermore, both of the current TPP candidates are effectively right-wingers. It's not as if our side has been given much of a choice...
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #167 on: March 03, 2015, 05:49:12 PM »

Also I would like to echo the point made by Duke and Averroes, among others, that I find the fact that Labor is seeking to poach a seat held by their partner in the last election, without whose support they could not have won*, to be distasteful and something that should have been disavowed by Labor as a condition of our endorsement of a unity ticket. (I don't hold this against anyone, however, as it is of course something thought of in hindsight, something they did not have...)

I've remained silent about this until now, but you're forcing my hand. The only conditions of the unity ticket in regards to Senate seats that was requested was 1) TPP requesting BK be on the ticket and 2) we asked that the NE Senate seat not be contested by TPP (as it, too, was being vacated by a member of the ticket); in exchange, we'd have our unity ticket and we wouldn't contest the Governorship. Despite the fact that it was not upheld, we did not complain like you are doing now, nor buck on our other agreements...

Just to clarify: I don't bring this up to be petty or anything. It's just that there is continued public complaining here about a hypothetical and something that was not asked or requested, whereas we did not do so when an explicitly-requested and effectively agreed-upon arrangement was essentially tossed out the window. In addition, I found it quite disturbing that someone as qualified as Talleyrand - who is in many respect a Person himself - was scoffed at in such a way.

I was wholly unaware of such an agreement, one to which I was clearly not privy. If this is indeed the case then the point made about bad faith is not quite applicable to you, nor could you reasonably be said to be engaging in pettiness...  hopefully someone involved in these negotiations will clarify the situation for us all.

While the party bureaucracy processes my dues and forms, I'll comment that everyone has come to a consensus very quickly. By the end of the day, The Party should just proceed to a vote on whether DKrol or I would receive endorsement, with a run-off option. If members really want to, they can write-in Adam and The Party can deal with rule complications if he somehow wins.

Every hour spent arguing over minutiae is an hour we cede to Labour in organizing voters. And we only have 271 hours to spare!

I agree entirely.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #168 on: March 03, 2015, 05:51:40 PM »

I was wholly unaware of such an agreement, one to which I was clearly not privy. If this is indeed the case then the point made about bad faith is not quite applicable to you, nor could you reasonably be said to be engaging in pettiness...  hopefully someone involved in these negotiations will clarify the situation for us all.

Thank you.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #169 on: March 03, 2015, 06:12:06 PM »

Yes, I was also unaware of the terms of the agreement because I am no longer involved in the decision making of The Party these days.

Had I been involved, I may have handled it differently. Tongue

Of course, I also understand that the current candidates are not palatable to the Labor, which is ok too, what is done is done, here we are with our candidates, so we have to make the most of it, and I need to learn to accept things and move on.
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,205
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #170 on: March 03, 2015, 06:45:50 PM »

I was unaware of a formal agreement as well and had I been, I certainly would've insisted that any demands regarding the NE Senate seat made by Labor apply just the same to BK's seat.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #171 on: March 04, 2015, 07:05:48 PM »

Bump?
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #172 on: March 04, 2015, 10:42:11 PM »

I'm still here. Don't you worry dear boy.
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #173 on: March 05, 2015, 07:43:55 AM »

By a vote of 6-4, the motion to hold an open ballot has failed. With that, the primary vote will be held between Foucaulf and DKRol only.

This will last 48 hours. Please vote using the below ballot.

Senate endorsement

[ ] DKrol
[ ] Foucaulf
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,205
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #174 on: March 05, 2015, 07:45:25 AM »

Senate endorsement

[X] DKrol
[ ] Focaulf
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.078 seconds with 11 queries.