Lumine's Election and Political Tracker (Epilogue) - Tracker Closed

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I trust you mean PPT and not PTT.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I hope NC Yankee wins the election.....he's one of the finest fellows I've dealt with on this Forum and even though I do not have much of a horse in the Presidential race,I was sure to come back and vote for him- I hope others do as well

I appreciate that.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sentiments expressed by Zuwo and Clarence reflect to a large extent the sentiment amongst the Federalists who have voted for DemPGH either as one or the other sentiment or a combination of the two. Not having a Federalist in this race combined with the Laborites running DemPGH instead of someone else, meant that a lot of Federalists felt no cause of concern about the White House going to Labor. DemPGH, even when he was just considering running for At-Large Senate in December, was looked upon favorably as a possible candidate for that "Third Non-Federalist At-Large Senator" by the Party, he was a great VP and a fair administrator of the Senate.

I would also say to MAxwell, and as he subsequently acknowledged (whether it was sarcastic or sincere ), support for several hardcore Laborites, especially by Dallasfan himself, neutralized his greatest selling point as VP with regards to the Senate from the perspective of many Federalists. He would have been better off making his case directly to the Federalists and stating what he would or would not do as VP, which could have potentially saved several votes. Presuming that such would have done more damage then good was reasonable though, particularly not seeing ahead of time that it would be quite this bad even without that. Even then I was surprised that the discontent with that ticket ran so high, but perhaps this surprise was a false perception created by the endorsement vote. Prior to that endorsement vote, I thought DemPGH should a good chance at actually winning the Federalist endorsement vote outright or at least coming rather close. That initial perception was closer to the truth more so then the subsequent one in terms of overal Federalist support (kind of like Survey Atlasia's polling cycles this time, three days are less accurate then five, MAxwell, in spite of the election day length ).

Finally this ticket's base was too narrow and not even the TPP stayed united 100%. It had no regional diversity and even doubling up on NE, failed to deliver all the necessary votes even there. It had no connection to the Federalists at all, not even with a former member and thus had to rely on the merits of the two candidates on the ticket to win enough support from that Party. The problem is there again, both fit into a narrowly libertarian quadrant with one more conservative and the other mroe liberal and left little appeal to conservatives particulaly social conservatives and obviously the Laborites were not going to split on those issues or any for that matter post reconcilliation with Nappy and the decline of the internal opposition to DemPGH. They didn't take a solid stand on healthcare and eliminated another great selling point to Federalists (opposition to single payer) on the fiscal side. The lack of a controversial Labor candidate and inability to split labor, lack of a Federalist, or at least something to unite the Federalists in support of the ticket and even an inability to win several key votes (like all the TPPers or an Indy like Grumps), taken together, it is death by a thousand paper cuts.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Cris, didn't X vote for me? He is Labor.

Also, ZuWo - I honestly have nothing to say if your complaint is that I opened a voting booth late? Regardless of how you count it (nationally or regionally), it is easier for the SOFE to administer the voting booth for federal elections. Regions should administer regional elections.

Was it really an intention to delay the booths as a protest, or was it an oversight?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Could have sworn that X changed to Labor when he re-registered.

Anyway, delaying booths was eh 90% oversight because I would forget or not see the thread. I think there may have been one thaf I delayed on?

I never noticed this particular incident, but if a large number of conservatives did, it might have been considered a bit remicisent of the same approach used by the rimjob supporters, though on a smaller scale obviously.

Another paper cut I suppose.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Could have sworn that X changed to Labor when he re-registered.

Don't feel bad I was thinking the same, though having him colored in as red on my Regional Senate tracker probably contributed to the mistake.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The far biggest problem for the Federalists is that the activity of last year was built on an activity bubble amongst several members and thus skipping a few races, or running complete novices as the alternative was unavoidable for an election or two.

The root of the problem for the Federalists is that there isn't a candidate who can please both the median voter and their base.

It is a secondary problem. The discontent expressed with votes for people like Tmth illustrate that there are candidates who can bridge the divide, but it is tough and most of those type of candidates are likewise older and often fit into that category I described above.

Duke came closer to achieving this than anyone else ever will, yet his presidency has left the Federalists fractured. He barely mustered enough enthusiasm from them to win renomination against a veritable nutcase, and at least one person left the party in protest.

Duke made a lot of mistakes during his first term. The biggest was not becoming a Federalist and also constantly expressing doubt about his running for a second term. The former meant severe breakdown in communication, and the latter meant that people were beginning to plan "post-Duke" as early as December. Duke often communicates and acts in a matter that works wonderfully as long as all the matters the immediate circle who knows and loves him. The doubt about running again was probably disappointment expressed outwardly, but even I misread it based on sheer number of mentions of the matter in public and private.

He also nearly made the same mistake as Sirnick, leaving himself without a tangible connection to the party on an issue set, just as Matt was transitioning from a Federalist insider to something of a rogue agent.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sentiments expressed by Zuwo and Clarence reflect to a large extent the sentiment amongst the Federalists who have voted for DemPGH either as one or the other sentiment or a combination of the two. Not having a Federalist in this race combined with the Laborites running DemPGH instead of someone else, meant that a lot of Federalists felt no cause of concern about the White House going to Labor. DemPGH, even when he was just considering running for At-Large Senate in December, was looked upon favorably as a possible candidate for that "Third Non-Federalist At-Large Senator" by the Party, he was a great VP and a fair administrator of the Senate.

I actually agree completely that with - I think DemPGH is going to make a very good President, just as he did a very good Governor. With the way the results are looking I'm disappointed for SirNick, but both choices were very capable in this election.

But the fact is that President DemPGH and, with him, Vice-President Windjammer means total Labor Party control of the government, with the ability to pass their entire platform unhindered. That's what the Federalists who voted for DemPGH voted for. That doesn't particularly bother me, but I'm not a Federalist - it's literally unjustifiable from a "centre-right" or remotely "conservative" perspective, and, as I said earlier, really might mark the end of the Federalists as a party worth taking seriously.

Why is anyone taking a party that rarely bothers fielding a candidate in national races seriously in the first place?

That's a good question, considering they came close to outright endorsing the candidate of their supposed ideological rival anyway.

e: One would imagine that the Federalist second preference vote for Snowstalker was a protest vote - if there'd be any chance that he'd win it would not have materialised.

The Federalists have a long history of falling in love with various candidates from the left, something Nappy should know quite well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sentiments expressed by Zuwo and Clarence reflect to a large extent the sentiment amongst the Federalists who have voted for DemPGH either as one or the other sentiment or a combination of the two. Not having a Federalist in this race combined with the Laborites running DemPGH instead of someone else, meant that a lot of Federalists felt no cause of concern about the White House going to Labor. DemPGH, even when he was just considering running for At-Large Senate in December, was looked upon favorably as a possible candidate for that "Third Non-Federalist At-Large Senator" by the Party, he was a great VP and a fair administrator of the Senate.

I actually agree completely that with - I think DemPGH is going to make a very good President, just as he did a very good Governor. With the way the results are looking I'm disappointed for SirNick, but both choices were very capable in this election.

But the fact is that President DemPGH and, with him, Vice-President Windjammer means total Labor Party control of the government, with the ability to pass their entire platform unhindered. That's what the Federalists who voted for DemPGH voted for. That doesn't particularly bother me, but I'm not a Federalist - it's literally unjustifiable from a "centre-right" or remotely "conservative" perspective, and, as I said earlier, really might mark the end of the Federalists as a party worth taking seriously.

As surprising as it may seem, as far back as last year, there has been a strong element in the party that hasn't been too concerned about the Senate, something that often made me somewhat of a dissident voice at times within the Party last year.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The far biggest problem for the Federalists is that the activity of last year was built on an activity bubble amongst several members and thus skipping a few races, or running complete novices as the alternative was unavoidable for an election or two.

The root of the problem for the Federalists is that there isn't a candidate who can please both the median voter and their base.

It is a secondary problem. The discontent expressed with votes for people like Tmth illustrate that there are candidates who can bridge the divide, but it is tough and most of those type of candidates are likewise older and often fit into that category I described above.

I disagree. Who could pull this off? There isn't anyone who can unite the two, because the demands of the Federalist base are in direct conflict with the expectations of the median voter.

You might think the same thing about Labor, but when you consider the Laborites that we've elected to the presidency (Marokai, myself, and - I hope - DemPGH), it's obvious that we don't work the same way. And if Duke had chosen to run as our candidate in September or even in February, he would have won at least nine out of ten Labor votes.

If Tmth were still active and had gone through with his abortive run, he "could" have pulled it off. There are maybe one or two others who could have as well, but that gets back to my main point before. Even amongst the right or perceived right, running a base candidate runs into the same problem as well. It doesn't really challenge my contention that the primary problem is a that an acitvity bubble burst and we need to cycle in some newer talent.

Duke came closer to achieving this than anyone else ever will, yet his presidency has left the Federalists fractured. He barely mustered enough enthusiasm from them to win renomination against a veritable nutcase, and at least one person left the party in protest.

Duke made a lot of mistakes during his first term. The biggest was not becoming a Federalist and also constantly expressing doubt about his running for a second term. The former meant severe breakdown in communication, and the latter meant that people were beginning to plan "post-Duke" as early as December. Duke often communicates and acts in a matter that works wonderfully as long as all the matters the immediate circle who knows and loves him. The doubt about running again was probably disappointment expressed outwardly, but even I misread it based on sheer number of mentions of the matter in public and private.

He also nearly made the same mistake as Sirnick, leaving himself without a tangible connection to the party on an issue set, just as Matt was transitioning from a Federalist insider to something of a rogue agent.

I don't blame Duke. He has had a successful presidency. It was the Federalists who barely lobbied him at all in his first term and never even attempted to pull together a policy agenda that Duke could assist them with. They always needed him more than he needed them.

Matt was supposed to be the Federalist representative within the administration, but it was clear from early in Duke's first term that he had become not just an unreliable liaison, but a renegade working to undermine the Federalist Party. Yet it took months for the Federalists to stop attempting to work through him.

To your personal credit, you've done a lot to fix all of this over the past couple of months.

I didn't say I blamed Duke either, but it was a mistake to not join the Party and to keep casting doubt about seeking a second term both publically and private. The encoruaged dissension and meant that Federalists were were disatisfied would just wait him out for Maxwell or someone else in February instead of trying to work with him. I would also point out that the Senate had six Labor "elected" Senators and any agenda that would please the right would be DOA until at least January, and by then the February cycle was well under way as well as the "post-Duke" mindset.

I don't blame Matt either, his view were changing and he had a lot of pressure on his activity from real life. I should have sought to discourage the "wait him out approach", but on the flip side I was reluctant to discourage the Party from having other options ready to go with him so likely to retire as it seemed at the time. I was also an IBer and had little direct connection with large Whig Conservative base outisde of the IDS since dissolution and thus I clashed with the Party on many things, over the course of 2013, and felt fortunate that December was so much better thanks largely to Maxwell taking the same approach as mine.

I disagree mainly because losing March and most of April cost precious time and not to mention possibly the two votes that could have made the difference in April. And as much as I try to listen as I pledged to do back in Februaty, I find it worthless if people don't talk about their concerns.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I still can't fathom why the Federalist Party did not nominate a candidate. There are plenty of credible people in the party; Hagrid, Tmth, Yankee (who actually considered a run), and others who could have held the banner against two left of center candidates.

Nix makes a good point, but I don't believe the issues he pointed out would have played as large a role as he thinks. With Duke's residual popularity and a split in the left, there's no question that they could have made a serious play for the presidency. And even if that hadn't been the case, the party has always nominated respectable candidates to carry the party flag (such as Cathcon in February 2013). I see no reason why this couldn't have been the case this time around.

There was no way I could run after what happened in March. I also turned down a VP offer because I didn't want to undercut a potential candidacy that then never materialized and was still not in a position to commit to any kind of run until really the end of May (including even reelection to the Senate).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What happened in March?

My mom's fiancee passed away.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think my chairmanship did a lot of damage to the Fed party, to be honest. I focused too much on Senate and Presidential races and not enough on building a Federalist base of rising stars who could eventually be Senators or President.

If anyone was qualified to compensate for deficiencies in such areas, it was Tmth and losing him was a big hit to the Party.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why would an actual libertarian vote for the atlasian right? The things they support economically are either already in place or have no chance of passing. There is a larger portion of voters that are socially authoritarian than there is economically right wing voters.

Most of the Libertarian views on social issues are already in place is well though. You vote based on the where the ground is to be gained, otherwise the game is over for you is it not?

Didn't the Liberal Party run into that problem by your own admission? "It accomplished what it set out to do" and now the left is dominated by the Labor Party.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

For one, there's a private message from a few months ago to you that should give you a decent idea.

Other than that, I have a record of being fiscally responsible, and of not being beholden to the interests of the left. Remember, I left Labor when I thought it went too far. DemPGH left Labor, ran as an independent, rejoined Labor, lost the Labor nomonatoon, left Labor, rejoined Labor later.

I am not talking about me, Sirnick. That is the point of this conversation, for the most part, why so many Federalists aren't voting for you.

That is a good case to make I suppose but lets broaden out from just Federalists. There were several other key votes that were lost last night beyond just those in Labor, even some TPPers who voted for DemPGH, which is what underpinned by response to Simfan in the form of the question. It seemed to not register with several voters.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

I don't know. I mean I'm sure there is a viable way to build a coalition that could claim that they oppose nationalising everything under the sun.

The problem with social issues is that people keep on inventing things to liberalise, like this polygamy thing or blanket drug decriminalisation. On the other hand TNF is rehashing ideas that were rather tired 70 years ago.

THat a key TPP member's first response to that question is "I don't know", should be alarming, Sirnick.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

For one, there's a private message from a few months ago to you that should give you a decent idea.

SIRNICK'S SECRET MISSIVE TO FEDERALIST INSIDERS REVEALED!!!

OOH SCANDAL OOH  OOH

Amazing how irrelevant your Party becomes when you don't run a candidate, so irrelevant that you get both angles as to why each candidate not from your Party is better than the other or why you should support one over the other.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

I don't know. I mean I'm sure there is a viable way to build a coalition that could claim that they oppose nationalising everything under the sun.

The problem with social issues is that people keep on inventing things to liberalise, like this polygamy thing or blanket drug decriminalisation. On the other hand TNF is rehashing ideas that were rather tired 70 years ago.

THat a key TPP member's first response to that question is "I don't know", should be alarming, Sirnick.

Oh come on, its easy to pile on sirnick now that he is getting creamed but lets not act like simfan isn't a right wing federalist who has played a big part in spreading petty attacks against the left. He's closer to a Riley than a sirnick.

Hopefully for Sirnick's sake, he will  realize what I am really doing. I am most certainly not doing tihs just to "pile on".

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Simfan, the bill allowed kids to view porn with parental consent. It didn't allow children to be in porn. If it did then I know Dallasfan would be all in favor of revising it to prevent that. I don't know wht anyone would think otherwise.

And my message to NCY wasn't all that exciting unfortunately. I was considering joining the Feds before I left Labor. Now my dream is starting a party called "the Gentlemans Party". It would be the TPP or Liberal Party plus top hats and monocles.

Or that, damn when you meant months, you really meant MONTHS. I frankly don't even recall the details specifically at this point, just the general points.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

but lets not act like simfan isn't a right wing federalist who has played a big part in spreading petty attacks against the left. He's closer to a Riley than a sirnick.

I knew Riley had friends in the TPP, but I didn't know who all was counted as such.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

I don't know. I mean I'm sure there is a viable way to build a coalition that could claim that they oppose nationalising everything under the sun.

The problem with social issues is that people keep on inventing things to liberalise, like this polygamy thing or blanket drug decriminalisation. On the other hand TNF is rehashing ideas that were rather tired 70 years ago.

THat a key TPP member's first response to that question is "I don't know", should be alarming, Sirnick.

It would be if it wasn't Simfan. He kind of does his own thing.

Yes, but if Nappy is right that he is a Federalist at heart TPP in name, then guess who should have been test case number one for how to get enough Federalist support.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yeah, if you remember the general points then you remember the whole thing. I also, in reply to your other comment, do see what you're doing and were trying. Unfortunately a few people we had counted on didn't end up voting our way. One flipped a coin, another forgot he pledged to me then apologized when he realized, and there is one bothersome one that won't reply to me (and I legitimately just want to know why I lost that person's vote).

Regardless, we are still actively involved in the GOTV effort.

You always get some many interesting stories out of elections like these about voters who did this or that.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What ideas have the Federalists come up with? How have they articulated an opposition to Labor that could persuade people in the middle that voting for their opponents would be a bad idea?

What was Sirnick's basis for convincing voters they should vote for him instead of DemPGH?

For one, there's a private message from a few months ago to you that should give you a decent idea.

SIRNICK'S SECRET MISSIVE TO FEDERALIST INSIDERS REVEALED!!!

OOH SCANDAL OOH  OOH

Amazing how irrelevant your Party becomes when you don't run a candidate, so irrelevant that you get both angles as to why each candidate not from your Party is better than the other or why you should support one over the other.

No comment on the message's contents? What about you, Sirnick? This is not something to float in public unless you plan to reveal what's going on.

Apparently he was talking about something much older, whereas I thoguht meant the appeals I received from both sides in this election back a few weeks ago starting in MAy I think.

Like I said I don't remember the specific points, just general disatisfaction and/or disappointment I suppose would be the way to term it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well to be frank, I found him easier to deal with then Nix most of the time.