Survey Atlasia: February At-Large Senate Special Election

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Goldwater.

One candidate should absolutely be out of contention, and I am honestly so disappointed to see Federalists struggling with this decision. Goldwater is our candidate, and he is a fantastic one. I will have a hard time voting for any Federalist in the future who gets this decision wrong. If I make enemies saying that, I make enemies saying that.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Reponses like "get over yourself" to perfectly reasonable comments are exactly why people don't want Napoleon in the senate. Has Marokai been harsh? Sure he has. But he hasn't resorted to bullshit like that. And the second someone does, the whole debate goes to hell in a handbasket. The senate has gone through too many periods of inactivity to have somone come along who'll discourage participation even more.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

No, you know exactly what you're doing. I take issue with a lot of what you do, but one thing you're not is stupid.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Well, honestly... I wouldn't have dug myself into this hole to begin with. It might be a start to avoid telling people to get off their high horses and putting words in their mouth, though. The only reason I "make a fight out of it" is because I don't believe someone whose job performance was so universally disapproved of just months ago should somehow get a pass when there are numerous candidates who don't have that record of negativity. And I think that's fair.

Also, I just want to note that my last comment was directed at your post before you edited it. This part was new:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Now, you know I've said before that I appreciated the respectful debate from you on the Firearms and Mental Health Act. I also agree that it was unfortunate more senators weren't willing to contribute to the discussion. And I'll give you credit for signing it (even though I'm sure you knew we would have overridden the veto anyway). Now, I'm not sure why you decided to change your tone with this particular bill, but this example is unfortunately a bit of an anomaly. I'd like to think it's partly because you know I'm not willing to take shit, but I might be giving myself too much credit.

Despite all this, I really don't hate you. Straight up, I just don't enjoy working with you that much. And I'm not the only one. I think having you in the senate will impede the process, so I won't be voting for you. If others want to give you another chance, that's fine. They're free to argue their point just as I'm free to argue mine. I only hope we can do it without putting words in people's mouths, being overly sarcastic, or throwing names around.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I was talking mostly about your response to Marokai. You've answered most of my jabs pretty respectfully, to be honest.

About the second part... I decided early that I wasn't going to sit and take it like a lot of other people seem to do. Maybe you don't realize exactly how you come off sometimes, but when you say I'm on the attack, I usually feel like I'm really on the defense! Maybe I've over-corrected. Either way, I think it's likely we're both a little wrong. Obviously I think I'm in the right more often than not (I assume think the same about yourself), but that's fine... there's always room for me to improve the way I deal with others, so your input is noted. I guess I just don't see all this willingness to cooperate that you keep talking about. Instead, I see you walking into threads and saying things right off the bat like "I'll never support this," "lol," or "it will be vetoed" without much follow up. Where was the willingness to cooperate when you vetoed three straight bills without actually trying to make things agreeable for you beforehand? And you're right... when that stuff happens, I am not quiet and I do not let myself get steamrolled. I think it's better than saying nothing, but maybe I'm wrong.

Either way, to your credit, I think we are actually seeing some improvements. I liked the conversation we had on my bill. There have also been a few other olive branches elsewhere. But I still don't think it's enough to outweigh everything else. Sorry.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I will be voting for Cathcon, but I just want it to be on the record that if Marokai wins, there was no "coasting to victory." The platform that he and Duke produced has got to be one of the most detailed campaign documents I've ever seen in Atlasia.

Marokai's win only seems innevitable because the Liberal centre did not put out a candidate. If they did, you can rest assured that it would've rendered the unity scheme pretty useless. Did Marokai and Duke luck out? Maybe a little. But it's not an "unbeatable" ticket.