2014 October Presidential elections, political loser

[Napoleon]

There was no avoiding the Ogis thing with Tyrion and honestly many in the Labor Party knew what his deal was they should have had the courtesy to tell you that you were putting a fraud in at VP.

[Adam Griffin]

There was no avoiding the Ogis thing with Tyrion and honestly many in the Labor Party knew what his deal was they should have had the courtesy to tell you that you were putting a fraud in at VP.

To be fair, this is true. It was a huge oversight on my part. The Tyrion/Ogis thing was such a huge open secret that it was very hard after awhile to remember who knew and who didn't (I'd say no less than three dozen people in the game directly knew). It was mainly an oversight because at the time Tyrion joined, DemPGH and Labor were on very bad terms and by the time everything settled, Tyrion had been in our ranks for months and months, and many were under the impression he would be a legitimate force in the game until or unless he was elected President and at the end of said term.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I never said you were at fault for the decisions. The Presidents made their choices and ultimately bare the responsibility for tha and the results. I did joke that it was your fault Duke couldn't pick Maxwell as VP on the account of all the Laborites in the Senate then, but that was you know, a joke.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There was no avoiding the Ogis thing with Tyrion and honestly many in the Labor Party knew what his deal was they should have had the courtesy to tell you that you were putting a fraud in at VP.

To be fair, this is true. It was a huge oversight on my part. The Tyrion/Ogis thing was such a huge open secret that it was very hard after awhile to remember who knew and who didn't (I'd say no less than three dozen people in the game directly knew). It was mainly an oversight because at the time Tyrion joined, DemPGH and Labor were on very bad terms and by the time everything settled, Tyrion had been in our ranks for months and months, and many were under the impression he would be a legitimate force in the game until or unless he was elected President and at the end of said term.

We knew last October or at the very least he was sock of Xahar or someone close to Xahar, but didn't know what we could do except to do our damnest to elect Superique. It was the first race I took a hand in trying to work aside from my own and Duke's IDS Assembly campaign  year prior, since dissolution. And once he had been a legitimate player for so long, we sort of shared the same impression regarding him as you.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

From my perspective your shattered dream could have turned him into DemPGH at worst and at best a do nothing. The biggest source of unity between Labor and Duke passed the Senate in his first term with the support of 2/3rds of the Federalist Senators as well.

Ugh, read again what all 3 Labor Presidents have said in this thread, Yankee.

No, you should read my subsequent post. I have several times ackwowledged that you DID NOT control your Presidents.

Yet we're at fault for them making what you say are bad decisions?

The reality and the truth of the matter is that each President from our Party made decisions as he saw fit, with no negative repercussions applied or implied by the Party. I elected people; I didn't tell them what to do once they got there by and large. No one else had the authority to do so, either. Whether that results in it being "our fault" for not being dictatorial in that sense or not is irrelevant; I merely wanted to clarify since some were implying that "Labor" ruined a bunch of Presidents by forcing them to act in a certain way (bullshit). Therefore, any "dream" of mine didn't turn anyone into anything. Each President makes a choice as to whom he wants to work with and how he works with others, plain and simple.

And besides, this conversation was and is about how the Federalists only can elect people who not only they don't "control", but who don't even pursue an agenda that is consistent with the party. If you'd do the latter, then the former wouldn't be an issue of control, and my seeming contradictory explanation wouldn't have been needed. Rather, you guys count as a victory something that results in us not getting 100% of what we want. And as I implied prior, as long as you're willing to play the game from that dynamic, you'll never really win, because your "victories" will be nothing more than our losses, and Labor draws its strength and unity more than anything from unrelated groups of people uniting solely to try to cock-block us because they're weaklings and sore-losers.

The far and center-left isn't any easier to keep in line than the far-right and center-right. We had three factions, too, when I joined the game (the loonies, the serious leftists and the liberal heroes). Now go out and organize your party, recruit a perfectly manageable 10 people or so, and stop waxing nostalgically about being perpetual losers/playing the victim card all the time.

We seem to be speaking different languages or maybe I am nuts because it seems a lot that people tell me stuff and mean the exact opposite anymore.

I never said you were to blame for the decisions. What of Duke's agenda was inconsistent? A lot of his stuff was passed by wide margins, because it had Fed and Labor support. However the controversial stuff that passed were close votes that happeneed only because shua had been added to the Senate in December, including healthcare, scaling back that minimum wage hike and a few other measures as well. Consolidation had the support of then Chairman Maxwell and his successor Tmth. What is so inconsistent?

I cannot convince people to participate by conceding the public square these false narratives, Adam.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I didn't almost join the Labor Party because of a communication breakdown. Aside from you, dear Yankee, I was basically being shown the door and nearly lost in a primary to a guy who hadn't played the game in years and was running a less than serious campaign. Yes, I hadn't made up my mind on running again, but no one really approached me on the matter until it was too late. The only reason I remained in the Federalist Party was because of you, Yankee, as you, and Marokai, are my best friends in this game and my longest tenured allies. We go back to 2009 together.

You were being shown the door because Maxwell thought you were out and made a rather careless mistake by not waiting for your decision to be finalized. All of us were to blame for that
situation developing, but it could not have ever happened if you had been in the conversation as opposed to at a distance, or had Maxwell as VP. Either way, the lapse would not have occured. A a sense of disappointment unfairly squared solely at you over Consolidation and the two labor bills that had support by other Federalists, presence in the communication would have reduced that from building up. Those are the only two reasons underlying the whole of February. Also if we could have passed that healthcare records and tax code reform sooner, it would have helped greatly.

It was no secret then and now that I opposed nationalization, but at the time that policy plank was not in serious discussion amongst the Labor Party, and for all intents and purposes, they were making me feel welcome and had promised support. Adam and I have a history together dating back to the first TPP, so it made sense for me, and I have never been controlled by anyone, and it wouldn't have started had I switched. Adam is a smart guy - he knows I am just a wild horse who's tough to tame.

The personal relationship is real, but so is the concerns you raised on numerous Labor backed proposals that you thought were not grounded in economic reality. Starting with that minimum wage bill you never would have been able to scale back. And there was no indication that Tyrion would defect and despite numerous efforts, no Laborites would go for bill lacking single payer during the debate and the key lynchpin there was the addition once again of shua to the Senate back in December.

I am not and would never have performed as DemPGH did in office. I knew what I could do and what I couldn't do and I was aware of public perception, let my income tax cute example stand and evidence to that.. when it became apparent our budget could not take any tax cutting, I dropped it immediately. While I inherently believe in lower taxes, I am always aware of the limitations budgetary concerns play in the debate, and I was unwilling to cut certain safety net programs. I wanted to expand Nixcome and simply our welfare system, but oh well, maybe another time.

So what, a true Federalist President isn't suppose to be able to count? The point of all this is that Adam is saying you were so deviant that electing you was a loss for the party and the right. I have yet to see any instance either in terms of the whole agenda or specifif issues iwth the exception of two areas (consolidation and labor w/ small l {I would note that I am also something of a moderate here on this last one as well, so was Hagrid}) where you were so out of line with the party, especailly when the last 2/3rds were considered.

I don't think you would have ended up like DemPGH precisely because of the decisions would have made and did make. But in terms of those big and controversial policies where you did follow your economic instincts, they wouldn't have happened as the Labor Senators would not have gone with them.

Regarding my first term, I was able to reform the corporate tax code (even TNF supported it, don't you know?), outlaw at will employment and pass the Pacific bailout. The closest thing I had to a partisan fight was the healthcare I passed in the last days of my second term, but that was largely a collaborative effort, as I had initially wanted to model our system like Singapore.

I was running the Senate man, of course I know. There was little indication that any Laborites would go along with the healthcare law and remember we were worried that they would try and delay the vote long enough for DemPGH to get in and veto it.

All in all, I am a solutions guy and not very ideological. I knew our healthcare system was in bad shape and we needed a change, so we did it. I maintain I doubt things would have been any different had I joined the Labor Party aside from some of the votes I got in the general. I never really had any party pulling my strings because the Federalists didn't want to touch me, aside from you of course and I wasn't a member of the Labor Party.

I wouldn't pull any President's strings, it is not my style as you know. Some things would have been different simply because the Labor Senators were rather solid and as you recall there were plenty of 5-5 votes that Matt broke out way in the second term. Some of them were pretty important and stated a concern that the Laborites were wrong on all of them. What would have happeend on those issues? Would bad policy have continued?

But really, it doesn't matter, because I stayed loyal to you as I have always promised to do in hard times, and will always continue to do, and remained with the Federalists, scraped out a primary victory over Mike Naso, and the rest is history, and I hold no hard feelings to anyone involved during that period. Both Maxwell, Hagrid and I have gotten over the differences we had the time, and life goes on, as it should.  

It does matter because you made the right choice then and shouldn't equivocate on that now. I have known you for five years Duke and you have always been to the right on economics so much that I think either those issues would have been entirely ignored or you would have been stymied on them by members of your own party in a labor scenario. On the other hand the sources of opposition from amongs the Federalists that occured were often the result of exaggeration, misinterpretation and very often coaxed by those with a personal interest at stake.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I liken trying to manage left/centre-left voters akin to trying to herd cats on catnip in a room full of laser-pointers.

[Maxwell]

I could've and should've communicated better with Duke, though I did consider running against Duke anyways due to what I thought was an egregious handling of Labor bills. Still, I think Duke did a good job overall throughout both of his terms and I say let bygones be gone.