SENATE BILL: Empowering Regions in Elections Amendment (Failed)

[Napoleon]

1. Then the JCP knows what it is doing! Though considering Snowguy's most recent post in this thread you may want to revise your statement to be a little more, I don't know, truthful?

2. You can't say it makes no sense and conveniently ignore, again, as usual, my arguments, which happen to make perfect sense.

3. This amendment actually makes less work for the SoFE by allowing Governor's to count the votes. Not that the SoFE needs less work and apparently a deputy is required even for that.

[Marokai Backbeat]

1. Then the JCP knows what it is doing! Though considering Snowguy's most recent post in this thread you may want to revise your statement to be a little more, I don't know, truthful?

He supports the unnecessarily convoluted amended version that will have more opposition for no reason. Hip-hip hooray.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is not that difficult to grasp.

1. The President is elected by a national popular vote. Breaking it down to the regional level necessitates five different counts and then a combination of all the votes. The SoFE would then, if he was responsible at all, double check. This is extra work for no reason and doesn't make sense in the context of how we elect the President.

2. The regional Senator is elected within the boundaries of that region and thus, putting it under regional administration requires no extra work whatsoever and doesn't make anything more complicated because regions already hold separate unrelated elections in concert to the Presidential election anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is insanely naive and irresponsible to suggest that the SoFE should simply take the regions word for it without checking the numbers themselves. In practice it is exactly what Bgwah described in his opposition to the original version. (Which, ironically, was ridiculous an untrue, but suddenly becomes entirely true against your version.)

[Napoleon]

Marokai, take your pills, relax, and get it through your thick skull that I'm not bgwah, I don't always agree with bgwah, and, God forbid, possibly have my own opinions and policy proposals.

It is time I come clean. The extraordinary amount of legislation I've put toward this session: bgwah wrote it! I'm only doing what I'm told! Sorry everyone, I'm not even Napoleon, I'm a clone of bgwah mistakenly repackaged!

Please. We know you lost Marokai but you don't have to be a sore loser because people happen to have better arguments than you. And please continue to ignore the points I make over and over again. It really shows what you're working with up in that head of yours. I'm impressed!

[Marokai Backbeat]

For someone who bitches at me for allegedly being personal you're doing a remarkably good job at trying to only make this about me instead of responding to anything I'm actually saying about what you're proposing.

I have concerns over your proposal and am actually agreeing with Bgwah on something; being unnecessarily complicated is bad, and you're being unnecessarily complicated. Hell, if a region did change their voting system, you're asking a region to vote on regional and federal offices, with two different voting systems, in the same thread. I just don't understand the purpose of what you're trying to pass off here, and it doesn't make sense in the context of how we elect the President. That is all.

If the Senate wants to pass this version, go for it. But if there's any confusion or unnecessary extra work caused by it, don't be surprised when I say "I told you so." (Because you can rest assured I will be there to say "I told you so.")

[Napoleon]

You have yet to address my argument as to why the current proposal will not suffice. Is it, perhaps, too complicated for you? Or would you like to make another post about how I, bgwah, and the entire JCP are satanic monsters? Oh, that's right. I forgot that I am supposed to sit here and smile as you throw bombs around like a mad man.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Dude, aside from my usual comment about how I'm irritated at the JCP, I've done nothing but argue about the merits of the proposal at hand. It's not even my opinion, either. Considering the percentage of what I've dedicated in my posts here to the actual topic, it's objective.

Which, frankly, I've said my piece about. I can't be blamed if you preferred to accuse me of being some sore-lose madman in need of medication instead of respond to my argument against the amendment. If the Senate wants to pass this, go for it. If the Senate doesn't want to pass the amended version, also, super. All I care about it reform, and I desperately want to see any change at all. As the game's resident game reform freak, changes to the game that are as efficient as possible is my chief concern.

So I leave you guys to it. (And I hope that our back and forth has actually been useful to the others, since the Senate is hardly in a position to complain about something getting debate. )

[Napoleon]

I hope that the Senate will consider my proposal on its merits. A single ballot for elections would make voting simpler for our citizens and would increase turnout for downballot races. The current proposal might actually decrease turnout for the sake of making things interesting. Since less voters doesn't interest me ands shouldn't interest you, consider this amendment.

I'd like to also point out that post after post Marokai ignored almost everything I said, as is usual. You may not care but I personally find it "interesting".

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
An Objection has been entered.


Senators, a vote is now ope on the above amendment, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Then there is no need to separate the Senate elections from the Presidential. Either we operate with one ballot for all races, or a separate one for federal and regional governments. I don't see how my amendment had anything to do with an electoral college, all it does is consolidate ballots, which is a good thing. The election would remain the same other than who opens the booth.

I mentioned an electoral college only because would need to decide how to tally the regional results.  Due to IRV, the results of a vote counted separately in each region would not be the same as the result if it were counted nationally.  So you could have votes counted in each region, and then the total number of each region's winner post-IRV calculation be added, with a national FPTP between up to five candidates. Or you could have an IRV last involves only those candidates that weren't eliminated in each region - which would mean a candidate could be counted at the national tally with votes from one region but not from another, even if the candidate had received votes in both regions before the regional IRV calculations.

Aye on the current amendment.

[bgwah]

aye

[Napoleon]

Nay

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Aye

[Antonio the Sixth]

Aye

[CatoMinor]

Aye

[CatoMinor]

I am afraid that (Napoleon's proposal) would just make things more complicated. The Senate races are already five separate elections and would remain five. The Presidential race however is one election that would be broken into five. 

So for your amendment I'll have to say not friendly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There isn't a worse time to have a Session Time-out, then while voting. And I am logged in indefinately.


Aye for the second time.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

At least I didn't imagine it... I can't keep an eye on everything

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

At least I didn't imagine it... I can't keep an eye on everything

You had your eye on it long enough to see "secret ballot", but not the words "May not employ" earlier in the sentence?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

At least I didn't imagine it... I can't keep an eye on everything

You had your eye on it long enough to see "secret ballot", but not the words "May not employ" earlier in the sentence?

I didn't read it, it came up in discussion...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

At least I didn't imagine it... I can't keep an eye on everything

You had your eye on it long enough to see "secret ballot", but not the words "May not employ" earlier in the sentence?

I didn't read it, it came up in discussion...

What "issues" were you refering to then in the SE? That is what you iniated the discussion with.

[CatoMinor]

What is this "SE" you guys keep bringing up?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on passage of Amendment 44:31:

Aye (6): AHDuke99, Antonio V, bgwah, Jbrase, NC Yankee, and shua
Nay (1): Napoleon
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (3): Fuzzybigfoot, officepark, and Snowguy716.

The amendment is passed and regular debate resumes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A vote on the next amendment will be held starting tomorrow morning. I don't want to hold them this close together or people won't realize it is a new amendment.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think considering the issues in the Southeast - one of the standards that needs to be explicit in any amendment like this is to ensure a uniform public or private voting system.

What happened in the Southeastern? My amendment says in public.

I believe - the Senators from the SE might be able to enlighten us on this - I heard something about an amendment to allow the SE to hold secret ballots at the regional level?

The only amendment I know of is the one I offered two days ago in this thread, TO BAN SECRET BALLOTS. What are you talking about?

At least I didn't imagine it... I can't keep an eye on everything

You had your eye on it long enough to see "secret ballot", but not the words "May not employ" earlier in the sentence?

I didn't read it, it came up in discussion...

What "issues" were you refering to then in the SE? That is what you iniated the discussion with.

I misunderstood the proposal... carry on.