Labor Fall Convention- Welcome to Boston

[VPH]

Chair
[X] Blair

Vice Chair
[X] Harry S Truman
[  ] Peebs

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Chair
[X] Blair

Vice-Chair
[1] Truman
[2] Peebs

[Flake]

Blair

1. Peebs
2. Truman

[LLR]

Are we really going to elect a 15-year-old representative who betrayed our party to become Tmth's VP to be vice-chair - and doesn't really want to win - over a brilliant strategist who's served our party for a long time? Really?

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Are we really going to elect a 15-year-old representative who betrayed our party to become Tmth's VP to be vice-chair - and doesn't really want to win - over a brilliant strategist who's served our party for a long time? Really?

Wait, are we? By my count, it's 8-4 Truman right now.

[Blair]

Order from the Floor. Order.

[Leinad]

Are we really going to elect a 15-year-old representative who betrayed our party

What a welcoming environment Labor has!

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Are we really going to elect a 15-year-old representative who betrayed our party

What a welcoming environment Labor has!

You know, we don't invade your convention thread with catty comments.

For the record, I am by no means entitled to this office. The vice chair is the servant of the Labor Party, and if some feel it is time for a change in leadership, they have every right to vote accordingly. I don't feel that it was out of line for LLR to question Peeb's commitment to the party, however; the role of the vice chair is to support Labor's candidates in the general election, and as the representative was the presumptive Federalist nominee for vice president as recently as a week ago, it's natural for there to be concerns about her fitness for the position.

Regardless, Peebs is a valued member of the Labor Party and an excellent congresswoman; I look forward to voting for her in a few weeks, and will campaign vigorously for her election in my capacity as the re-elected Vice Chair of the Labor Party .

[Blair]

Are we really going to elect a 15-year-old representative who betrayed our party

What a welcoming environment Labor has!

Didn't your conference lead to someone trying to get expelled, and a new party starting?

[Leinad]

You know, we don't invade your convention thread with catty comments.

Oh really? Not to mention all of the posts Adam has made meddling in various controversies concerning Ben Kenobi and JCL.

Didn't your conference lead to someone trying to get expelled, and a new party starting?

The majority of the party is not responsible for the antics of a few members--unless you're going to support the ideological perfectionism of the ultra-conservatives (certainly no real progressive would), and their ridiculous narrative that Federalists need to unite around the Atlasian "Conservative" Party's homophobic platform.

And Labor has had a similar effect as of late--except instead of members leaving due to ideological diversity, it was the other way around, where a Laborite no longer felt welcome.

Also, Peebs shouldn't be ostracized for "betraying the party"--that's the kind of behavior (fiercely enforced loyalty) I was trying to address with my overly snarky interjection. She sided with a great Atlasian to try to save a game that really needs help--the same Atlasian a couple key members of this party spent so much of their time trying to smear.

While I haven't done nearly as good a job as I wanted to as either Vice-Chair or President, I like to think I've been welcoming of ideological differences, and let the members breathe. Labor, for such a long time, has used a heavy-handed approach in party leadership: acting as if "betraying the party" is the worst possible sin one could commit and smearing people's character for the sake of a forum game. This is not positive behavior for any of us. That's the point I was attempting to convey, but it perhaps wasn't executed in the best or most respectful manner.

[Blair]

Labor, for such a long time, has used a heavy-handed approach in party leadership: acting as if "betraying the party" is the worst possible sin one could commit

I challenged a sitting Labor President, and literally lead a rebellion through our February convention. I find it a bit ironic to be lectured about 'heavy handed' leadership when me and Truman where then elected as Chair and Vice Chair, and the entire party united together in the common interest.

I've got a lot of other stuff to say about your comment, but this isn't the place for this. I've worked hard over the last 6 months to make Labor a welcoming place for people across the political spectrum.

We stand together in solidarity because we know that we can achieve so much more when we're strong, and united

[Blair]

The time for voting has now closed


By a unanimous vote Blair is re-elected as Party Chair.

By a vote of 8-4 Truman is elected as Vice Chair.

[Clyde1998]

What's next - voting on the proposed by-law changes?

[Blair]

Correct.

Members have 48 hours to propose changes to the By-Laws (If anyone wants longer send me a PM) as I assume most of the plans have already been drawn up.

The by-laws we have are from before the Con-Con, and I'd want to see reforms to the Primary System to actually make it clear (as someone who's run, and ran Primaries there's very little rules to go by)

[Clyde1998]

Just reposting the earlier suggestions.

A proposed amendment to section VII of our by-laws.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While we're talking about the bylaws, I think it might be a good idea to ad the position of Congressional Leader to the politburo. My thought is that the Congressional Leader would be chosen from among the Labor House delegation; he or she would be responsible for leading the Labor Congressional Caucus, setting federal legislative priorities in conjunction with the Chairman, and recruiting candidates for House and Senate. Ideally, this person would become the Speaker of the House whenever Labor holds a majority in that chamber.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Blair]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Blair]

Does anyone have issues/concerns with this package of reforms to the by-laws?

[Clyde1998]

Does anyone have issues/concerns with this package of reforms to the by-laws?

The only thing that I'd wish to discuss is enabling non-party members (ideally independents or parties listed as "other") to vote in Primaries, who have consistently supported Labor candidates - which is what my proposal was.

I have no issue with anything else in the package.

[Poirot]

For the definition of supporters

You must be logged in to read this quote.

maybe you could specify first preference vote or excluding write-in joke candidate as first preference.

[Blair]

Would this actually bring anyone in the Primary System? I mean has anyone voted Labor in the last 3 elections who isn't in the party/isn't in UA?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Would this actually bring anyone in the Primary System? I mean has anyone voted Labor in the last 3 elections who isn't in the party/isn't in UA?

Off the top of my head, Badger and Siren would be eligible to vote in Labor primaries under these rules.

[Clyde1998]

Would this actually bring anyone in the Primary System? I mean has anyone voted Labor in the last 3 elections who isn't in the party/isn't in UA?

Off the top of my head, Badger and Siren would be eligible to vote in Labor primaries under these rules.

That sounds about right for Federal elections.

There may be others for regional elections. The proposal extends to have different 'eligible supporters' for regional primaries for those who've voted for the Labor candidate for Governor over the previous three Gubernatorial elections.

[Blair]

I'm scarred by the registered supporter scheme of any type just because of the amount of abuse that the system can cause

[Clyde1998]

I'm scarred by the registered supporter scheme of any type just because of the amount of abuse that the system can cause

I think realistically, the amount of people that would use this scheme would be people who are 'leftist' anyway. It's highly unlikely that someone would vote for a Labor's candidate in three consecutive elections (for a year) in an attempt to abuse any system that we have in place.

We could always have a system where party members have to 'vet' the supporters, to ensure that no-one dodgy can slip through the net, if that's more tolerable.