PLP Senatorial Thread

[Хahar 🤔]

If you want to have a spot on the PLP list for the midterms, please announce that here. You do not have to be a member to request a spot, although preference will be given to members. At the end, we will take a vote on a final list.

Vice-Chairman Xahar

Declared PLP candidates:

• Xahar
• Sensei
• EarlAW
• HappyWarrior

Declared non-PLP candidates who have expressed interest on this thread:

Declared non-PLP candidates who have not expressed interest on this thread:

• South Park Conservative (NLC)
• Hashemite (NLC)
• Lewis Trondheim (I have no idea)
• CultureKing (JCP)

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Put me on the list.

[Sensei]

although I would have liked to have been put in the loop about this, put me on the list.

[Хahar 🤔]

although I would have liked to have been put in the loop about this, put me on the list.

Oh. Sorry.

[exopolitician]

Im interested, but im kinda confused about everything.

[HappyWarrior]

I am considering but have not decided if I will enter the race yet.  Expect an official announcement following the upcoming Mideast ballot.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Im interested, but im kinda confused about everything.

I would be more than glad to clear everything up for you, if I can.

The April 2008 "Midterm" Elections will be governed, for the first time ever, by the Proportional Representation Act.  The Act, entered into force on December 31, 2007, effectively eliminates all five "Districts" and requires the five district senators to be elected from Atlasia at-large.

So, old system, you'd be voting for just one Senator.  In the new system, you vote for five.  Almost all of the new complexities are to be found on my end with regard to calculating vote totals.

Parties are in no way required to, nor are they limited to filing "only" five candidates.  Statutorally, parties have no 'official' say in this.  The law does not recognize any benefit to party organization, other than allowing for the filling of vacancies.

Just like before, all that is required to run for office is a simple declaration that you're running for office, done in the official thread.

[Hatman 🍁]

I would like to be put on. Thanks.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I am withdrawing my name from Senate consideration.

[HappyWarrior]

I would like to announce I will also be making a run for the senate this April.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

I would not mind a preference from the Progressive Liberal Party. I understand if you don't.

[Hatman 🍁]

I would not mind a preference from the Progressive Liberal Party. I understand if you don't.

Weren't you a member?

[Robespierre's Jaw]

I would not mind a preference from the Progressive Liberal Party. I understand if you don't.

Weren't you a member?

I was for about a week or less. Then I decided to re-join the NLC. Don't ask me why I did so.

[Hatman 🍁]

I would not mind a preference from the Progressive Liberal Party. I understand if you don't.

Weren't you a member?

I was for about a week or less. Then I decided to re-join the NLC. Don't ask me why I did so.

[Sensei]

I would not mind a preference from the Progressive Liberal Party. I understand if you don't.

Weren't you a member?

I was for about a week or less. Then I decided to re-join the NLC. Don't ask me why I did so.

You're obviously going to appear on my ballot, but if you wanted to get a preference, you should have stayed.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I was for about a week or less. Then I decided to re-join the NLC. Don't ask me why I did so.

I'm a bit confused by your statement here, but altogether not surprised by it.

If you want to be a member of the PLP, then you should rejoin and stay there.  If you want to be a member of the NLC, you should make a decision about staying there as well.  I know you're having trouble deciding between your old and current party and your friends in the "PLP 13/14-year-old caucus."  I've already made the arguement why I you're ideologically and geographically suited for the NLC, no need to repeat it ad nauseum.

There is little doubt that you have ambition for higher office, but you seem interested in doing everything you can to scuttle your chances at winning it.  You joined the NLC and then failed to support a single NLC candidate in a contested race your entire time there.  You gave Gov. MAS117 your word that you wouldn't run against him, weeks later changed your mind and forced him out of the race, and then weeks after that (after getting NLC support for your gubernatorial bid) you abandoned the bid to run against the NLC-endorsed candidates for President/VP.  And even before joining the race as Sensei's VP, you promised Jas and myself your vote in the NLC primary (Polnut for the Progressive Primary; Jas for the NLC Primary, you said) and then went back on your word shortly after, not unlike going back on your word against MAS117.  It's not that I'm looking for someone who will blindly toe the party line or unquestioned loyalty, but I don't think it's too much to ask for at least a little bit of loyalty.

Had you not given up your run for Governor to seek election to the Vice Presidency as a PLPer, you'd be in office right now.  Had you been a member of the NLC when I made the decision to accept President Phil's SoFA offer, you'd have been my pick for my own Senate vacancy.  But you were an active PLPer, and I gave my support to Hashemite instead.

And now, shortly after getting my support for an April Senatorial bid as an NLC candidate, you go ahead and start saying that you have no idea why you ever went back to the NLC in the first place.

Straddling the line does you few favors.  If you're really not sure whether or not you want to be in the NLC, then please know I'll take that as a key factor when I decide whom to support in an April NLC Senate primary.  Reaching out across party lines for support is a good thing; throwing your current party under the bus to do so is not, at least to this voter.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

I was for about a week or less. Then I decided to re-join the NLC. Don't ask me why I did so.

I'm a bit confused by your statement here, but altogether not surprised by it.

If you want to be a member of the PLP, then you should rejoin and stay there.  If you want to be a member of the NLC, you should make a decision about staying there as well.  I know you're having trouble deciding between your old and current party and your friends in the "PLP 13/14-year-old caucus."  I've already made the arguement why I you're ideologically and geographically suited for the NLC, no need to repeat it ad nauseum.

There is little doubt that you have ambition for higher office, but you seem interested in doing everything you can to scuttle your chances at winning it.  You joined the NLC and then failed to support a single NLC candidate in a contested race your entire time there.  You gave Gov. MAS117 your word that you wouldn't run against him, weeks later changed your mind and forced him out of the race, and then weeks after that (after getting NLC support for your gubernatorial bid) you abandoned the bid to run against the NLC-endorsed candidates for President/VP.  And even before joining the race as Sensei's VP, you promised Jas and myself your vote in the NLC primary (Polnut for the Progressive Primary; Jas for the NLC Primary, you said) and then went back on your word shortly after, not unlike going back on your word against MAS117.  It's not that I'm looking for someone who will blindly toe the party line or unquestioned loyalty, but I don't think it's too much to ask for at least a little bit of loyalty.

Had you not given up your run for Governor to seek election to the Vice Presidency as a PLPer, you'd be in office right now.  Had you been a member of the NLC when I made the decision to accept President Phil's SoFA offer, you'd have been my pick for my own Senate vacancy.  But you were an active PLPer, and I gave my support to Hashemite instead.

And now, shortly after getting my support for an April Senatorial bid as an NLC candidate, you go ahead and start saying that you have no idea why you ever went back to the NLC in the first place.

Straddling the line does you few favors.  If you're really not sure whether or not you want to be in the NLC, then please know I'll take that as a key factor when I decide whom to support in an April NLC Senate primary.  Reaching out across party lines for support is a good thing; throwing your current party under the bus to do so is not, at least to this voter.

Okay. Well thanks for that insight Mr. Moderate.

Let me elaborate on my comments I made yesterday. I was unsure which party I wanted to be in because they both had appealing elements. I am sticking with the National Liberal Coalition and when I stated I was not sure why I did so, I was referring to the switch from the NLC to the PLP, not vice versa.

[Хahar 🤔]

SoFA, can I get a list of all declared candidates? I've lost track.

[HappyWarrior]

I think the party should limit the number of candidates we put forward for the Senate to either two or three.  These candidates should be chosen in a party primary.  This is to ensure we do not allow vote splitting to ruin our chances as a party.

[Sensei]

I think the party should limit the number of candidates we put forward for the Senate to either two or three.  These candidates should be chosen in a party primary.  This is to ensure we do not allow vote splitting to ruin our chances as a party.

I concur. Let's make it three.

[HappyWarrior]

When would everyone like to start the voting?

[Sensei]

we might as well just take a vote on who we don't want on the list.

[Meeker]

Hmm, I wonder how this vote is going to turnout...

[HappyWarrior]

we might as well just take a vote on who we don't want on the list.

Start it whenever you like Mr. Chairman.

[Sensei]

If anyone has any objections, make them in the next day, because otherwise I'll be opening the booth tomorrow night.