Tack poll: Opinion of the two party/coalition system in Atlasia

[Former President tack50]

There has been a relatively large movement of protest against the current 2 party system in Atlasia reciently. So I am opening this poll to ask the opinion of the Atlasian people over this subject.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The longer Labor remains dominate, the more unpopular this is going to be and by extension our unpopularity as well and that pisses me off because it is very much how the RPP got dragged down simply by doing its job to provide competition to the JCP. This time, I refuse to eat half of the blame for bgwah's ego mania.

Without the right in this game to provide competition, it will collapse in six months.

[Lumine]

I continue to find it dull and counterproductive to a more engaging game.

Can't speak for most people, but at least I personally find Atlasia more engaging and fun when you have several parties interacting with each other as opposed to a more predictable - and vicious - duel between merely two (or one in which there's a single uber-dominant party, which I disliked when it was the Federalists and also dislike now that it is Labor) which is, for all purposes, a battle of who brings more zombies to the battlefield or who is more prepared to maintain or shift the rules for the sake of an advantage.

You can issue a lot of criticisms at how many of the non-Federalist and non-Labor parties have conducted themselves (Liberals, DRs, the original PU, TPP, CR, UA, Peace, PUP, Alliance, ACP, Montfortian) or how they died, but when they're around the game becomes - for me - vastly more interesting than a straight battle of attrition in which only a handful of players in either big party (or the single dominant one) call the shots.

[Former President tack50]

The longer Labor remains dominate, the more unpopular this is going to be and by extension our unpopularity as well and that pisses me off because it is very much how the RPP got dragged down simply by doing its job to provide competition to the JCP. This time, I refuse to eat half of the blame for bgwah's ego mania.

Without the right in this game to provide competition, it will collapse in six months.

I have to agree with that last sentence; Atlasia obviously needs competition and otherwise it collapses quick.

Since you are one of the few who was there when it happened, would another "double dissolution" (like the RPP/JCP one) be a good idea now if problems get bad enough? I fear we would just end with more of the same just under a different name tbh.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I continue to find it dull and counterproductive to a more engaging game.

Can't speak for most people, but at least I personally find Atlasia more engaging and fun when you have several parties interacting with each other as opposed to a more predictable - and vicious - duel between merely two (or one in which there's a single uber-dominant party, which I disliked when it was the Federalists and also dislike now that it is Labor) which is, for all purposes, a battle of who brings more zombies to the battlefield or who is more prepared to maintain or shift the rules for the sake of an advantage.

You can issue a lot of criticisms at how many of the non-Federalist and non-Labor parties have conducted themselves (Liberals, DRs, the original PU, TPP, CR, UA, Peace, PUP, Alliance, ACP, Montfortian) or how they died, but when they're around the game becomes - for me - vastly more interesting than a straight battle of attrition in which only a handful of players in either big party (or the single dominant one) call the shots.

I don't have a problem with multiple parties existing. In fact in many situations it is better to have them than not, and it is just as easy for the left to take over and dominate elections as it is for the big blob centrist party that Adam often bemoans. If you can leverage 3/5's to 2/3rds of the electorate, it really doesn't matter what the ideology is, in terms of competition the end result is the same.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The longer Labor remains dominate, the more unpopular this is going to be and by extension our unpopularity as well and that pisses me off because it is very much how the RPP got dragged down simply by doing its job to provide competition to the JCP. This time, I refuse to eat half of the blame for bgwah's ego mania.

Without the right in this game to provide competition, it will collapse in six months.

I have to agree with that last sentence; Atlasia obviously needs competition and otherwise it collapses quick.

Since you are one of the few who was there when it happened, would another "double dissolution" (like the RPP/JCP one) be a good idea now if problems get bad enough? I fear we would just end with more of the same just under a different name tbh.

Only over my dead body would the Feds be dissolved.


No. The Federalist Party was created just nine months after the RPP dissolved for a reason.

And frankly, the JCP dissolution ended up being only on paper anyway as Napoleon basically continued the same machine, but with bulked up numbers of centrists from former RPPers who joined them. This is why they won such huge landslides in 2012, capturing most of the center and libertarians even, while the left represented by Labor would second preference them.

This led to the formation of the TPP by Duke, who sought to recreate the centrist wing of the RPP as its own party and then finally the merger of the Whigs and the IB into the Federalist Party.

[windjammer]

Very positive obviously.

Bipartism has its problems but it is way more preferable than all of these third parties nonsense (TPP,...) that end up becoming "big tent" party cult full of members who got their ego crushed either by the Labor Party or by the Federalist Party.

[Former President tack50]

With 27 answers, time to publish and analyze the results. Maybe I'll do a second round if I get more votes

Atlasia at-large
Approve: 40.7% (11)
Disapprove: 51.8% (14)
Neutral: 7.4% (2)

Labor/Peace members (11 answers)
Approve: 61.5% (8 )
Disapprove: 23.1% (3)
Neutral: 15.4% (2)

Federalist/ACP members (6 answers)
Approve: 50% (3)
Disapprove: 50% (3)

Independents / Other parties (8 answers)
Approve: 0% (0)
Disapprove: 100% (8 )

Analysis

So overall it seems the Atlasian people are heavily divided on whether a 2 party system is positive or negative for the country, with an advantage to those opposed to it. This is most definitely not a strong mandate for the 2 major parties, but a successful third party challenge seems hard as of this stage. However, Lincoln seems likely to get several third party Councillors and Poirot did manage to get elected to the House, so maybe third parties are on the rise again?

As for party crosstabs, it's mostly what you would expect. Labor members mostly support the duopoly, since they are the larger of the 2 main parties as of now and thus benefit quite a bit from it. Meanwhile independents and small party members are frontally opposed for the exact opposite reasons, as it makes it more difficult for them to get elected.

Finally the Federalists/ACP are a bit more interesting. The sample size is small, but they are equally divided on the issue. Maybe they are worried about becoming a third party themselves and Wulfric was correct all along? Either way, certainly the most surprising result, though beware of a small sample (similarly, independents and others are overrepresented)

[Kingpoleon]

I agree, but when I led a centrist party, the members conspired to dissolve it against me.

[diptheriadan]

I agree, but when I led a centrist party, the members conspired to dissolve it against me.

*blows kiss*