PPT Nominations Thread

[Meeker]

72 hours to nominate

[Franzl]

I nominate HappyWarrior.

[Bacon King]

I second HappyWarrior's nomination.

[Franzl]

Do we really have to wait 72 hours after both declared candidates have been nominated?

[HappyWarrior]

I will of course accept the nomination for PPT of the Atlasian Senate.

[Meeker]

Do we really have to wait 72 hours after both declared candidates have been nominated?

Yup.

[RI]

Do we really have to wait 72 hours after both declared candidates have been nominated?

Yup.

Sigh. I suppose someone should, so...

I nominate DownWithDaLeft.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I accept the nomination

[Bacon King]

Okay, so the voting will be sunday night? You guys just debate or something until then.

[Meeker]

I'm legally bound to keep the nomination thread open 72 hours. My hands are tied.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Another senator wish to propose a question to the nominees?

[Bacon King]

Questions to both nominees:

1. The office of President Pro Tempore requires a great deal of level-headedness and maturity. What examples can you provide to the Senate that show you possess these traits?
2. Will you in any way allow your partisan standings interfere with what is intended to be a completely nonpartisan position?
3. Do you have any substantial disagreements with any current Senators? Do you feel these disagreements could interfere with your ability to be an effective PPT?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Questions to both nominees:
1. The office of President Pro Tempore requires a great deal of level-headedness and maturity. What examples can you provide to the Senate that show you possess these traits?

While I tend to get hot headed in other parts of the forum and when it comes to campaigning, never once have I let this spill over into the senate.  I have shown level-headedness in just accepting Al not putting my bill up instead of going crazy like some suggested that I do.  I have admitted defeat on bills when they will not go my way, and I was mature enough to realize I was not going to beat Al for PPT.  Frankly, none of my actions in my numerous times in the senate have been immature.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do not intend to allow my partisan standing to interfere with the PPT position, however, my goal in becoming the PPT is to make sure that many bills, mainly referencing the SPC bills here, get to the floor.  I feel like a lot can be accomplished this senate, but only the PPT does not try to hold things up.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do I have disagreements?  I do not know if that's the right word for it, I am angry at both yourself and HappyWarrior.  Yourself because I put myself on the line to get you elected and you have not even once shown civility, and Happy because I gave him my endorsement when he promised to be pro-regions, yet then abstained on the Council of Governors.  I fail to see how this would hurt my PPT ability though as I do not intend to strike any bills as frivolous.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would like to point out that Down has probably never read the Senate rules, certainly not in a serious way. If he had done, he'd have realised by now that he could easily have stopped me from preventing the so-called "Free Palestine" bill from reaching the floor. He certainly had the votes to do so.

[HappyWarrior]

Questions to both nominees:

1. The office of President Pro Tempore requires a great deal of level-headedness and maturity. What examples can you provide to the Senate that show you possess these traits?
2. Will you in any way allow your partisan standings interfere with what is intended to be a completely nonpartisan position?
3. Do you have any substantial disagreements with any current Senators? Do you feel these disagreements could interfere with your ability to be an effective PPT?

1.  I have always shown myself to be level-headed and mature.  I do not feel that I at any time have showed myself to be anything but.  I am never hot-headed and only under special circumstances allow myself to show anger.
2.  Of course not.  I do not feel that I have any reason too.  Bills need to reach the floor to ensure a strong and active senate and I do not plan to strike and bills unless they are utterly frivolous and useless.
3.  The only Senator I have a personal disagreement with is my opponent Senator DWTL because I consider him frankly to be a hot-headed bully.  He seems to throw temper tantrums whenever someone does'nt do exactly as he desires.  Other than that I feel I manage to get along quite well with my fellow Senators.  And I would not be running for PPT if I felt that this would interfere in my abillity to do the job.  I am not the kind of man to let personal problems take over my public responsibilities.

[Bacon King]

I'll have a more detailed response to both of you tomorrow, but DWTL, how exactly have I been a bully?

[DownWithTheLeft]

I'll have a more detailed response to both of you tomorrow, but DWTL, how exactly have I been a bully?

I don't believe I called you a bully, I said you have never shown civility and have drastically overreacted, for example threatening to resign if I am elected PPT.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I would like to point out that Down has probably never read the Senate rules, certainly not in a serious way. If he had done, he'd have realised by now that he could easily have stopped me from preventing the so-called "Free Palestine" bill from reaching the floor. He certainly had the votes to do so.

I have read the senate rules in depth and certainly have been in the senate long enough to see almost everyone put into place.  Most likely I would have been able to come up with the 1/3 votes necessary to override your decision, but doing what have been a waste of time as I did expect the bill to pass and only wanted the idea debated in the open.  I felt I was able to get my point across in debate on Jas's meaningless resolution

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would like to point out that Down has probably never read the Senate rules, certainly not in a serious way. If he had done, he'd have realised by now that he could easily have stopped me from preventing the so-called "Free Palestine" bill from reaching the floor. He certainly had the votes to do so.

I have read the senate rules in depth and certainly have been in the senate long enough to see almost everyone put into place.  Most likely I would have been able to come up with the 1/3 votes necessary to override your decision, but doing what have been a waste of time as I did expect the bill to pass and only wanted the idea debated in the open.  I felt I was able to get my point across in debate on Jas's meaningless resolution

Hahaha.

I object to Al's decision to kill my bill, while it may very well fail, there is nothing unworkable about it.  It sets out clear commands to both sides, and the reprecussions of not meeting them.  We are not threatening war, we are threatening to stop helping them if they do not meet our demands.

I'd bring it to court if I had the time

You wouldn't have a case anyway. Rules is rules.

You said argue, I presented an argument and you completely ignored it because I didn't include British "humour"

Hahaha.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I fail to see how any of that negates my point.  I could have override your decision, but as I said I did not feel it was worth the time.  Throwing out threats doesn't mean moving on those threats which is why I threatened a court case rather than an overrule of the OSPR.

Since Al is reminding us so well, can I remind the senate what happened the last time we elected the "anti-DWTL" candidate?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I fail to see how any of that negates my point.  I could have override your decision, but as I said I did not feel it was worth the time.  Throwing out threats doesn't mean moving on those threats which is why I threatened a court case rather than an overrule of the OSPR.

Hahaha.

It's quite clear from the language you used that you didn't have a clue what was going on (at least initially) or what you could do about it.

There's no point lying about it now; the truth is quite obvious to anyone with a basic grasp of English.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As I have said several times already, I made it very clear at the time that there would be serious restrictions on my time. Regardless, it isn't as though were an especially active Senator during that period...

[HappyWarrior]

I fail to see how any of that negates my point.  I could have override your decision, but as I said I did not feel it was worth the time.  Throwing out threats doesn't mean moving on those threats which is why I threatened a court case rather than an overrule of the OSPR.

Since Al is reminding us so well, can I remind the senate what happened the last time we elected the "anti-DWTL" candidate?

DWTL this is another example of your entirely skewed perspecitive.   I am not solely running as the "anti-DWTL".  I also feel I would be a strong PPT.  I have always respected my fellow Atlasians and I have always been a very active Senator.

[DownWithTheLeft]

DWTL this is another example of your entirely skewed perspecitive.   I am not solely running as the "anti-DWTL".  I also feel I would be a strong PPT.  I have always respected my fellow Atlasians and I have always been a very active Senator.

Well, you did state you were the "anti-DWTL" candidate.  I do not think of myself as the "anti-HappyWarrior" and I find it hard to believe you are not the "anti-DWTL" candidate when you did not want the position in the last senate as I did.  I also have respected my fellow Atlasians in the senate, outside I have been rash at times but this is a game and you did not succeed in a game, or politics, for that matter by being touchy feely.  I am a man of my word, I have never, as you have, told someone I was going to do something and then not done it.  I have held up every promise I have made.  If I can resurrect a type of political leaning that was dead in Atlasia, I think I can run the senate.  I have had at lengths discussions about the rules with fellow members and I have seen how PPTs abuse their power.

This much is simple and agreeable.  Never, and I mean never, have I made a promise to someone in Atlasia and not held up my end of the bargain.  You know that when I say I will be a fair and competent PPT, I mean it.

[HappyWarrior]

I have'nt made a promise and failed to keep it either.   In my interpretation of regional rights I have stood up for it.  Just because I don't want to make either side stronger does'nt mean I want to make regions weaker.  What you don't seem to understand DWTL is that just because someone does'nt do exactly as you desire does'nt mean they lied.  And by the way I lost the race your party endorsed me for.  The race I won was againest an RPP supported candidate who later went down in a cloud of scandel.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I have'nt made a promise and failed to keep it either.   In my interpretation of regional rights I have stood up for it.  Just because I don't want to make either side stronger does'nt mean I want to make regions weaker.  What you don't seem to understand DWTL is that just because someone does'nt do exactly as you desire does'nt mean they lied.  And by the way I lost the race your party endorsed me for.  The race I won was againest an RPP supported candidate who later went down in a cloud of scandel.

There is really nothing complicated, we gave you an endorsement with the promise that you support regional rights over federal rights, you did not hold up your end of the bargain.  It doesn't mean I cannot conduct senate business properly, it means I think you are a lousy senator.