Talk Elections

Hello there!

Welcome to my office.

()

So, what's on your mind?

I believe the Senate will soon be taking up the question of whether to contribute forces to implement a no-fly zone. I am interested in hearing the concerns of the public on this matter.

Hopefully we won't be too late, like we have been in the real world.

Sam Spade dislikes you.

Run.

Dear citizens of AtlAsiA,

I, ShuA, have presently A certain slight challenge in communicating And I hope you will bear with me through this time As I continue my work As your Senator.

in the meAntime, As Alwys, pleAse leAve me your thoughts on the importAnt mAtters of the SenAte being discussed on the AtlAsiA government boArd. 
Thank You.

"Shift" button acting up, eh? ;)

couldn't type "a" because accidentally had it set as a hotkey.  okay, am better now.

The election is coming tomorrow. Be sure to vote. We have some great candidates.

If reelected, I will seek to, among other things:

-seek passage of an amendment to raise a higher bar for engaging in war and other military action.
-promote a cautious and constitutional foreign policy.
-work against higher taxes, overbearing mandates and expansion of bureaucracy.
-protect regional self-government.
-stop draconian penalties.
-insist on a detailed understanding of the implications of proposed policy.
-encourage citizen input and improve the processes of government.

jerks should really stop blowing stuff up.

I'll be in an undisclosed location for the weekend.

I am interested in hearing from Atlasians on their comments and questions regarding the War Limitation Amendment to the Constitution which I am sponsoring in the Senate and is currently being debated.  Right now the bill reads as follows:


originally the bill contained a prohibition on conscription, but that found very little support in the Senate and so the 2nd part is a replacement for that.  I am particularly interested in hearing from those who support the idea behind this amendment but have specific concerns that we may be able to address through further changes, in order that  this amendment can receive broad support.

Also much thanks to PiT for coming up with the idea for this amendment.

I don't like the way it limits our power to act unilaterally.  I know how that sounds, but if you look at history, every time the US has gone isolationist, a world war has occurred.

What is this "US" that you speak of? :P

I'm fine with the amendment.

Only something I read in a book...
It was a book with big words and lots of pictures

Acting unilaterally causes Iraq's and Vietnams.  World wars never involve acting unilaterally.

Maybe unilateral action could have brought a quicker end to World Wars 1 and 2, decreasing the casualty toll? 

No. Just no.
I challenge anyone to try to form an argument showing a case where unilateral involvement would benefit us and be hindered by this ammendment.
Also, world wars never involve acting unilaterally. Unilateral action in WW2 means we would have taken on the Axis and the Allies by ourselves. No way would less casualties have been possible. Ending conscription would bring less casualties though.

Oops.  Wrong word.  Forget unilateral.

You'll notice that the wording of the bill also prevents of from fulfilling our treaty obligations with NATO or any of our other allies in the event they were attacked.

As to WWII, if we had acted in 1938 in tandem with Britain and France, when the Sudantland was invaded, Nazi Germany would have had less time to prepare for all out war.  We would have been able to use France as a base rather than having to launch a D-Day, and might have been able to bully Mussolini out of War if it he had seen the futility of war, precluding a North African campaign.

It does not prevent us from doing anything. The Senate would prevent us from doing that, just like they did in 1938 without any amendment similar to this in effect.

Without the law, the senate could theoretically act.  With the law, they could not unless they had a 2/3 majority.  Sure, congress in 1938 couldn't get a majority, much less 2/3s.  But if they had, WWII might have been much less bloodier.  Think with me for a moment, what if we lived in an alternate universe in which the US had acted in 1938 against the Nazi's by only a few Congressional votes.  Now were are having a conversation about how much more bloodier the war might have been if that congress had not acted.

Does that make sense?

It's hard to say whether the US could have made a decisive impact on the war at that time, but that's really more of a alternate history discussion than directly about the bill. As to the broader point though, there is a risk of not acting where we should, just as there is a risk of acting in ways that we shouldn't.  I believe that if we go to war, it is important that it be with broad-based support, both as a check on the passions of the moment, and also so we do not get ourselves into something where we are not fully committed. 
While I do believe the Senate will overwhelmingly approve fulfilling all our treaty obligations, it is an interesting point that I will consider further. 

I have sponsored the Senate Vacancy Regional Flexibility Amendment (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=137957.0), which is to receive a Senate vote soon.
Currently if there is a vacancy in a regional Senate seat, our Constitution requires the seat be filled by appointment by the governor.  I do not see the need for this. It is neither democratic nor regionalist. If a region decides they want to fill the vacancy by a special election, as I would prefer, they should be able to do this. If on the other hand, the region wants a vacancy to be filled by the governor or by the assembly, I would like to leave this option open to them as well. Or, there might be a combination of these based on when the vacancy occurs, as exists for at-large Senate seats.  Each region would be able to decide how to go about it, and the discussions each region has about it, and the diversity of solutions, will make Atlasia more interesting. 

I expect to be gone for the rest of the week. Citizens of Atlasia, I hope I can count on you to keep an eye on the Senate and voice your concerns to your Senators while I am unable to. As always, feel free to let me know your thoughts and I'll attend to them when I return.

press release from the office of senator shua:

>>>>The senator is currently weighing his options - whether to seek another term in the Senate or pursue other avenues in service of Atlasia. Friends and supporters may contact the senator with their comments, concerns and advice in this matter.

Endorsed for reelection! :)

! :)

When the Senate race jumped from 5 candidates to 7, I knew that, given the political leanings of the candidates and the party makeup of Atlasia, this race would be very hard  for me to win. So while I am a little disappointed to have lost reelection, I am not greatly so. It is more that I am grateful to have been given a term and a half as an At-Large Senator. I would like to thank those who urged me to run for reelection, as it was an enjoyable race, and also all those who supported my candidacy. Now I can go back and serve the final days of my Senate term and reconsider the other options before me when I decided to enter the race.

:(

A great man will be leaving the Senate. You were stellar.

You've far exceeded my expectations, serving with dignity and honor. Best of luck to you, you will be missed from the Senate.

It's a pity you lost. You were a capable Senator!

Sorry to see you've lost, shua - more of a quirk of the voting system than anything else.

I hope you'll consider running for the Mideast Senate seat. :)

It is certainly a shame to see you go. :(