Idea for running elections

[Sibboleth]

As I've said before I don't think we should do elections as we do in fantasyland. I think the reasons for that are obvious, but I'll explain them later if someone wants.

Andway.

I wrote this last November. Quite crude but:

The GM gives each "candidate" (word is in brackets as it could easily apply to a PR list of some sort) marks out of a given number based on the following:

Demographics how much appeal (generically) a given party has to the various groups of people in the given area.

Campaign marks given for how good the campaign (both nationally and locally) is.

National Support/Swing how well the election nationally is going for the party in question

Personal Vote/Influence the first speaks for itself (though note that an incumbent should always score at least 1 here, unless mired in scandal). The second refers to endorsements by local notables and so on.

Fraud also speaks for itself. Only to be used if the candidate/party tells the GM that it is trying to rig the poll.

Demographics and National Support/Swing should be, by far, the most important factors (which is more important depends on the area and depends on the party). Fraud has the potential to be unlimited, but the larger the scale, the more chance of being found out (but that's a GM matter obviously).

=

Examples:

Attlee with Morrison: D 10, NS/S 7, C 3, PV/I 2

Candidate A: D 8, NS/S 4, C 0, PV/I 2, TOTAL: 14
Candidate B: D 1, NS/S 7, C 3, PV/I 0, TOTAL: 11

Despite running a brilliant campaign in an excellent year for his party, Candidate B still loses because the demographics of the seat are so strong for Candidate A (who wins despite being a lazy party hack of the worst kind).

Henderson East & Clynes: D 10, NS/S 7, C 3, PV/I 1, F 5

Candidate A: D 5, NS/S 7, C 3, PV/I 0, F 0, TOTAL: 15
Candidate B: D 5, NS/S 3, C 3, PV/I 1, F 5, TOTAL: 17

An embattled incumbent in a swing seat cheats his way to victory.

=

Obviously, vote totals, percentages, majorities and the like should be up to the GM to make up as takes his fancy. Candidate B in Henderson East & Clynes would get about 53% if you just converted the figures into percentages, but if the narrative would be better if that election was a suspicious blowout or extremely close then it would make sense to change the figures accordingly.

Hope all that made sense.

[afleitch]

I like that idea. One question though. Would it work (with GM guidance) in 'landslide' scenarios, i.e if the opposition unseats the government and incumbents in style.

[ilikeverin]

Sounds good, but I still think some of the vote should be determined by the players.

[Kuu ülevaade olulisematest]

The GM should be elected.

[PASOK Leader Hashemite]

Sounds good, but I still think some of the vote should be determined by the players.

Agreed. Some sort of straw poll maybe?

[Platypus]

How about we make an ititial parliament-divided on left and right-giving each side 50% of the seats which are then divided by party registration, so, for example if there are 50 seats, the left has 25, of which 15 are Social-Democrats, 7 are Labour, and 3 are Greens? Those figures aren't final obviously. I feel that if we have a basic parliament to start off with, we have a basis for parties to win and lose seats. I like Al's basic frame a lot, btw, and I think the player's participation is obvious, ILV, in that we run the campaigns, have options re:fraud, and are responsible for PV/I, as well as being critical re:National results.

I suggest we might even have a parliament pre-constitution, or at least an Acting PM.

[Sibboleth]

I can easily make up some election results, in detail and with maps, if you want. What electoral system are we using?

[Kuu ülevaade olulisematest]

I can easily make up some election results, in detail and with maps, if you want. What electoral system are we using?

MMP

[PASOK Leader Hashemite]

I can easily make up some election results, in detail and with maps, if you want. What electoral system are we using?

Please do

IIRC, we're using something similar to Ontario's MMP.

[Sibboleth]

Curiously, we don't see to have agreed on anything. Could someone double-check that, just in case?
Either way; maps up tomorrow.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I'm up for.... anything really....

[PASOK Leader Hashemite]

Curiously, we don't see to have agreed on anything. Could someone double-check that, just in case?
Either way; maps up tomorrow.

bump

[Sibboleth]

The maps won't be by province but at a lower level (basically; I'm not the GM and am not willing to decide what electoral system we're using. But I'm going to try to add a load of detail to the background of this game anyway). And they will be done by tomorrow

[Sibboleth]

Leading party by district, canton, ward, cantref or whatever:


This is really just a pilot and doesn't matter much. Districts are not equal population, this is not supposed to be an FPTP election etc. The Franco areas were a bit of a problem for one or two reasons. Patterns mainly based on the stuff Colin wrote (very helpful in some areas, not so good in others) and stuff from the Party threads (ditto). A lot is totally random.
Anyway, hope to get the useful maps up tomorrow.

[Kuu ülevaade olulisematest]

Leading party by district, canton, ward, cantref or whatever:


This is really just a pilot and doesn't matter much. Districts are not equal population, this is not supposed to be an FPTP election etc. The Franco areas were a bit of a problem for one or two reasons. Patterns mainly based on the stuff Colin wrote (very helpful in some areas, not so good in others) and stuff from the Party threads (ditto). A lot is totally random.
Anyway, hope to get the useful maps up tomorrow.

What did you use to make this?

[PASOK Leader Hashemite]

Leading party by district, canton, ward, cantref or whatever:


This is really just a pilot and doesn't matter much. Districts are not equal population, this is not supposed to be an FPTP election etc. The Franco areas were a bit of a problem for one or two reasons. Patterns mainly based on the stuff Colin wrote (very helpful in some areas, not so good in others) and stuff from the Party threads (ditto). A lot is totally random.
Anyway, hope to get the useful maps up tomorrow.

Considering I wrote somewhere (maybe on the wiki) that the PC is strong in North Antillia (and considering I'm the only member from there, if you take that in account), I find it hard to believe the PC wouldn't win in North Antillia. That's really the only fault I find.

Also, you forgot the Greens, they have 2 members now !

[Colin]

Well since it seems like people are interested in this again I would be happy to provide, ie make up, demographic data, economic data, etc. that you need in order to create a true representation of what the political geography looks like.

Also if it does seem like this is actually going to take off, and I have time, I will write up the history that I laid out for Antillia.

[ilikeverin]

How about we make an ititial parliament-divided on left and right-giving each side 50% of the seats which are then divided by party registration, so, for example if there are 50 seats, the left has 25, of which 15 are Social-Democrats, 7 are Labour, and 3 are Greens? Those figures aren't final obviously. I feel that if we have a basic parliament to start off with, we have a basis for parties to win and lose seats. I like Al's basic frame a lot, btw, and I think the player's participation is obvious, ILV, in that we run the campaigns, have options re:fraud, and are responsible for PV/I, as well as being critical re:National results.

I was speaking more directly, e.g. a direct vote, straw poll, or something of that nature.  That way each player would be assured of enough vote to earn at least one seat.  We wouldn't want anyone sitting out who wouldn't have to.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

If that map holds I'm all sorts of screwed, unless that one tiny Tory smudge can carry New Wales, that being said, I'm not sure how it would work.

[Sibboleth]

Considering I wrote somewhere (maybe on the wiki) that the PC is strong in North Antillia (and considering I'm the only member from there, if you take that in account), I find it hard to believe the PC wouldn't win in North Antillia. That's really the only fault I find.

Ah, dammit, didn't notice that. But, as I said, this is just a pilot. The more important maps'll be party strength ones.

Also, you forgot the Greens, they have 2 members now !

I didn't forget them actually.

[afleitch]

As long as each party can win somewhere at this stage then i'm happy

[Colin]

Considering I wrote somewhere (maybe on the wiki) that the PC is strong in North Antillia (and considering I'm the only member from there, if you take that in account), I find it hard to believe the PC wouldn't win in North Antillia. That's really the only fault I find.

Ah, dammit, didn't notice that. But, as I said, this is just a pilot. The more important maps'll be party strength ones.

Also, you forgot the Greens, they have 2 members now !

I didn't forget them actually.

Ahem...Al...do you need any addition statistics in order to come up with a better party breakdown? Let us not forget that Antillia came out of this brain of mine, probably why it's as crazy as it is. I may comment on the map posted a little later, just to see how it meshes with what I thought of when making Antillia.

[Smid]

This looks very interesting, I think I'd be interested in being involved in some way.

[Sibboleth]

Ahem...Al...do you need any addition statistics in order to come up with a better party breakdown? Let us not forget that Antillia came out of this brain of mine, probably why it's as crazy as it is. I may comment on the map posted a little later, just to see how it meshes with what I thought of when making Antillia.

The main thing would be more information on the distribution of Franco's within each province.

[afleitch]

Good point.

I envisage us as being a nation that's been through alot; slipped into dictatorship in the 1930's-50's and only clawed out because of modern pressures and the death of an aging . A bit like Spain and Portugal but 30 years too late.

Using that as a model gives us a good grounding; an authoritarian, statist (not socialist) culturally conservative government, that has probably had a slow death. It gives us a degree of small parties, some new some old but oppressed formed into left and right blocs.

If we view the nation as being a nation of 'opposites' may I suggest the following

left v right
liberal v conservative (secondary to above)
anti-clerical v clerical (not as important now, mostly historic)
nationalisation v privatisation (state controlled economy at present - where to now?)
centralised state v devolved state
internationalist v isolationist (we've been isolationist for decades, very few nations doing business, self reliant etc)
European v American (to whom do we look re trade, alliance etc - linked with above)

So for example the PRD would be - right, liberal, anti-clerical, pro-privatisation, pro devolution, internationalist and European.