The State of Atlasian Parties

[Purple State]

Just something I have been sitting on for a while that I would like to share my thoughts on: the purported renewed rise of "strong parties" in Atlasia.

It cannot be denied that today's Atlasia is very different than that of a year or two ago. We have two large parties, the ProCon (pfkaRPP) and JCP, respectively representing the right and left. We have a smaller centrist party fighting to wield influence, as well as a smaller "loony" party seeking to satirize the system by... well... being a part of the system.

Many say that this "renewed vibrancy" in the game could only have occurred due to the strong nature of those two large parties, pointing to the relatively low cross-party voting of their members. Meanwhile, the DA and LNF are derided as "jokes," parties "without a message," "too willing to compromise," etc. The conventional wisdom is that such parties are simply a diversion, not benefiting the game and simply in vogue.

So here is my premise and question. We have massive voter turnout in elections to anoint party members that we agree with. Election season becomes a rabid dog-eat-dog atmosphere when the respective JCP and ProCon leaderships come out to keep the party on message and members in line. And come election day, all their efforts pay off and they get their respective candidates elected. But there is a catch; despite those efforts, does the state of the game shift to the right or left?

In fact, the party lines, once they reach the Senate or Presidency, are actually way more moderate than the "strong parties" would have us believe. Most bills pass the Senate with unanimous or near-unanimous (recently only because of Senator RowanBrandon's resistance and even that seems to be bending under consistent pressure to compromise) votes after being framed as compromises. Only the most hotly debated topics muster something like three votes opposed and even then the center is dominating the results (see Bow Chicka Bow Wow Bill). Meanwhile, despite sizable growth in the ProCon and JCP ranks, it is hardly disputed that this boom is transitory, built more on "now you see it, now you don't" members than anything serious; on the other hand, growth in the DA and LNF seems to be more about a calling to a specific message.

So what do we learn? While we do certainly have strong parties today, I would argue it is that aspect of the game that is in vogue, while loonyism and centrism are the ruling pillars of the game.

You may now commence tearing me to shreds.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I was going to comment but then I realized I don't have a damn clue what the point of this post was. So then I decided to say that instead.

[Purple State]

I was going to comment but then I realized I don't have a damn clue what the point of this post was. So then I decided to say that instead.

Just amusing myself... And, in a way, responding to all the hubbub about how the DA and LNF are irrelevant.

Don't worry, you will still get your GM numbers. The production of this thread in no way impeded that.

[Devilman88]

Huh?? I'm lost...

[Alexander Hamilton]

I don't think anyone contends that the DA and LNF are irrelevant, more that they aren't really major parties. Think Nader or Perot, not Bush or Clinton.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I'd never call you guys irrelevant, I don't know anyone that does for you or the LNF, you guys just thrive on the fact that you're constantly the "lesser of two evils" choice. Afleitch admitting that he sways with the wind isn't exactly a kind reflection on your party, for that matter.

The LNF is... different. But both groups have many people I like and respect.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I'd never call you guys irrelevant, I don't know anyone that does for you or the LNF, you guys just thrive on the fact that you're constantly the "lesser of two evils" choice. Afleitch admitting that he sways with the wind isn't exactly a kind reflection on your party, for that matter.

The LNF is... different. But both groups have many people I like and respect.

I don't think afleitch admitted that, exactly.

[Smid]

Atlasia could do with more independents and swing voters. Problem is, since to be on here, you have to be interested in politics, and to be interested in politics (and participating in Atlasia) you're probably going to want to run for office, and will almost certainly find a party to which you could associate...

[Purple State]

I'd never call you guys irrelevant, I don't know anyone that does for you or the LNF, you guys just thrive on the fact that you're constantly the "lesser of two evils" choice. Afleitch admitting that he sways with the wind isn't exactly a kind reflection on your party, for that matter.

The LNF is... different. But both groups have many people I like and respect.

This is less a critique about the treatment of the DA and LNF themselves, as much as what they represent, which is a loose middle that doesn't conform to the right-left divide.

Really, the point is that it's not just Afleitch that may sway with the wind, but the entire governing body. Despite the hard line leadership of the PCP and JCP, best seen in Rowan's reticence, most of the people elected tend to become much more moderate once in office. It seems the entire election sim is based around some sort of "strong party" premise while the actual governing sim is all about compromise and centrism.

Just my observations. I was bored, what can I do?

[Alexander Hamilton]

Keep in mind that the PCs are more representative of the center than the right.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I've certainly not changed my usually stubborn positions. I don't necessarily criticize Rowan for voting nay on everything, I criticize him for being closed-minded. I listen to everyone and I always ask questions and try to understand, but I vote the way I want to, I don't vote for any other reason.

The problem with the Senate is that it's pretty much right down the middle for Atlasian standards. Bills depend on the DA for passage, and you're not always predictable. If a bill is going to fail, usually everyone votes against it, if it will pass, usually everyone votes for it. This is a good and bad thing, mostly a bad thing in my humble opinion.

I ran, and continue to run, on trying to bring more honesty and fire to the Senate, I think I've done that. I think we've all stepped up on the debate. I would hardly call us a body of people who moderate when they take office.

If there are people who sway on the mood in the Senate in their votes, then I condemn them. We should always stand by our beliefs and debate on those, not spend our time trying to gauge the public mood and triangulate for the upcoming elections.

I have never cast a vote that I didn't believe in. I'm very proud of that fact.

[Purple State]

I've certainly not changed my usually stubborn positions. I don't necessarily criticize Rowan for voting nay on everything, I criticize him for being closed-minded. I listen to everyone and I always ask questions and try to understand, but I vote the way I want to, I don't vote for any other reason.

The problem with the Senate is that it's pretty much right down the middle for Atlasian standards. Bills depend on the DA for passage, and you're not always predictable. If a bill is going to fail, usually everyone votes against it, if it will pass, usually everyone votes for it. This is a good and bad thing, mostly a bad thing in my humble opinion.

I ran, and continue to run, on trying to bring more honesty and fire to the Senate, I think I've done that. I think we've all stepped up on the debate. I would hardly call us a body of people who moderate when they take office.

If there are people who sway on the mood in the Senate in their votes, then I condemn them. We should always stand by our beliefs and debate on those, not spend our time trying to gauge the public mood and triangulate for the upcoming elections.

I have never cast a vote that I didn't believe in. I'm very proud of that fact.

Yet, every vote is near-unanimous, which means either you are a closet centrist (almost fell over laughing just typing that), the bills are uncontroversial, or you are watering down your beliefs because you don't think it is worth the fight (which I suspect is closer to the truth and closer to where Rowan is heading).

Either way, no matter how hard line either "big" party may be, the game rests in the center and I don't see anything changing that. Not even a "firebrand" like you, Marokai.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I've certainly not changed my usually stubborn positions. I don't necessarily criticize Rowan for voting nay on everything, I criticize him for being closed-minded. I listen to everyone and I always ask questions and try to understand, but I vote the way I want to, I don't vote for any other reason.

The problem with the Senate is that it's pretty much right down the middle for Atlasian standards. Bills depend on the DA for passage, and you're not always predictable. If a bill is going to fail, usually everyone votes against it, if it will pass, usually everyone votes for it. This is a good and bad thing, mostly a bad thing in my humble opinion.

I ran, and continue to run, on trying to bring more honesty and fire to the Senate, I think I've done that. I think we've all stepped up on the debate. I would hardly call us a body of people who moderate when they take office.

If there are people who sway on the mood in the Senate in their votes, then I condemn them. We should always stand by our beliefs and debate on those, not spend our time trying to gauge the public mood and triangulate for the upcoming elections.

I have never cast a vote that I didn't believe in. I'm very proud of that fact.

Yet, every vote is near-unanimous, which means either you are a closet centrist (almost fell over laughing just typing that), the bills are uncontroversial, or you are watering down your beliefs because you don't think it is worth the fight (which I suspect is closer to the truth and closer to where Rowan is heading).

Either way, no matter how hard line either "big" party may be, the game rests in the center and I don't see anything changing that. Not even a "firebrand" like you, Marokai.

I think you are mischaracterizing Rowan's recent actions.

[Purple State]

I've certainly not changed my usually stubborn positions. I don't necessarily criticize Rowan for voting nay on everything, I criticize him for being closed-minded. I listen to everyone and I always ask questions and try to understand, but I vote the way I want to, I don't vote for any other reason.

The problem with the Senate is that it's pretty much right down the middle for Atlasian standards. Bills depend on the DA for passage, and you're not always predictable. If a bill is going to fail, usually everyone votes against it, if it will pass, usually everyone votes for it. This is a good and bad thing, mostly a bad thing in my humble opinion.

I ran, and continue to run, on trying to bring more honesty and fire to the Senate, I think I've done that. I think we've all stepped up on the debate. I would hardly call us a body of people who moderate when they take office.

If there are people who sway on the mood in the Senate in their votes, then I condemn them. We should always stand by our beliefs and debate on those, not spend our time trying to gauge the public mood and triangulate for the upcoming elections.

I have never cast a vote that I didn't believe in. I'm very proud of that fact.

Yet, every vote is near-unanimous, which means either you are a closet centrist (almost fell over laughing just typing that), the bills are uncontroversial, or you are watering down your beliefs because you don't think it is worth the fight (which I suspect is closer to the truth and closer to where Rowan is heading).

Either way, no matter how hard line either "big" party may be, the game rests in the center and I don't see anything changing that. Not even a "firebrand" like you, Marokai.

I think you are mischaracterizing Rowan's recent actions.

He has definitely held the line well so far, but you will see Marokai did so at first too.

You underestimate the power of the dark side compromise. At first you think you will hold true to your core values and all you hold dear, but soon you realize doing that will only hurt your cause by diminishing your voice, so you start to give a little to get a little and compromise is born.

[Smid]

I guess the way to reduce the impact of strong parties would be to move more towards PR-STV elections and then have the Senate appoint the President, rather than have a direct election model for President. I'm not suggesting we do this, just making the observation that a direct election model for President probably increases the likelihood of a strong party developing - because this increases the chances of that party winning the presidency. Then the other side notices the strength of the dominant party and takes steps to unite the other side of the political spectrum. Thus, we have a two party system in formation.

Even having a President appointed by the Senate wouldn't necessarily prevent the creation of a two party system - as long as there is a chance of dominating the Senate elections by increasing party membership, there will be an incentive to increase party membership. It is possible but not certain that having only one class of Senator, all elected simultaneously using PR-STV may perhaps create enough incentive for minor parties, (assuming the Senate will then appoint the President) but even that may not help.

Not that I consider a two party system in this game to be a problem. I'm merely observing how it seems to be happening.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I've certainly not changed my usually stubborn positions. I don't necessarily criticize Rowan for voting nay on everything, I criticize him for being closed-minded. I listen to everyone and I always ask questions and try to understand, but I vote the way I want to, I don't vote for any other reason.

The problem with the Senate is that it's pretty much right down the middle for Atlasian standards. Bills depend on the DA for passage, and you're not always predictable. If a bill is going to fail, usually everyone votes against it, if it will pass, usually everyone votes for it. This is a good and bad thing, mostly a bad thing in my humble opinion.

I ran, and continue to run, on trying to bring more honesty and fire to the Senate, I think I've done that. I think we've all stepped up on the debate. I would hardly call us a body of people who moderate when they take office.

If there are people who sway on the mood in the Senate in their votes, then I condemn them. We should always stand by our beliefs and debate on those, not spend our time trying to gauge the public mood and triangulate for the upcoming elections.

I have never cast a vote that I didn't believe in. I'm very proud of that fact.

Yet, every vote is near-unanimous, which means either you are a closet centrist (almost fell over laughing just typing that), the bills are uncontroversial, or you are watering down your beliefs because you don't think it is worth the fight (which I suspect is closer to the truth and closer to where Rowan is heading).

Either way, no matter how hard line either "big" party may be, the game rests in the center and I don't see anything changing that. Not even a "firebrand" like you, Marokai.

I think you are mischaracterizing Rowan's recent actions.

He has definitely held the line well so far, but you will see Marokai did so at first too.

You underestimate the power of the dark side compromise. At first you think you will hold true to your core values and all you hold dear, but soon you realize doing that will only hurt your cause by diminishing your voice, so you start to give a little to get a little and compromise is born.

No, he decided that he is going to try and run for re-election. That is all that changed.

[Marokai Backbeat]

There's only so much I myself can do, afterall.

There aren't two big parties in the Senate, though. So you're misrepresenting things. If it was just the JCP and RPP in the Senate, then perhaps your highlighting of things passing nearly unanimously almost every time (which isn't really true by the way) would carry more weight.

The DA comprises roughly a third of the Senate. If these swing votes go whichever the way the wind blows, it makes it seem like we're a mostly agreeable body. We're certainly not. Further, a few of our Senators are from Europe (or Canada), and European "centrists" or "conservatives" are not necessarily so by our standards. Combining two groups of people with major cultural differences can lead to such odd results.

He has definitely held the line well so far, but you will see Marokai did so at first too.

"At first"? When did I stop? I voted for left-wing legislation or issues of game reform. It's not my fault others did at well. My positions have been trending even more left-wing as of late, and my attitude certainly never shifted.

[Purple State]

There's only so much I myself can do, afterall.

There aren't two big parties in the Senate, though. So you're misrepresenting things. If it was just the JCP and RPP in the Senate, then perhaps your highlighting of things passing nearly unanimously almost every time (which isn't really true by the way) would carry more weight.

The DA comprises roughly a third of the Senate. If these swing votes go whichever the way the wind blows, it makes it seem like we're a mostly agreeable body. We're certainly not. Further, a few of our Senators are from Europe (or Canada), and European "centrists" or "conservatives" are not necessarily so by our standards. Combining two groups of people with major cultural differences can lead to such odd results.

He has definitely held the line well so far, but you will see Marokai did so at first too.

"At first"? When did I stop? I voted for left-wing legislation or issues of game reform. It's not my fault others did at well. My positions have been trending even more left-wing as of late, and my attitude certainly never shifted.

Perhaps this relates more to the PCP's failure to form as a truly conservative party, which forms a center-left government of right-center, center and leftist members.

On the other hand, if DA members truly went whichever way the wind blows, I would expect to see more disagreement in final votes. Instead, the DA is usually just backing up the winning side, which isn't hard to do considering the amount of consensus this Senate has seen. And yes, there really is that many near-unanimous final votes.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The DA is not a joke party, it's a real party that takes a great place in Atlasian political system. You can't compare it with LNF.

[Alexander Hamilton]

The DA is not a joke party, it's a real party that takes a great place in Atlasian political system. You can't compare it with LNF.

The LNF isn't a joke party really. Only Sewage. Maybe Lewis

Al's campaign is great haha

[Associate Justice PiT]

Perhaps this relates more to the PCP's failure to form as a truly conservative party, which forms a center-left government of right-center, center and leftist members.

     Which should come as no surprise when one considers the partisan breakdown of Atlasia.

[afleitch]

I'd never call you guys irrelevant, I don't know anyone that does for you or the LNF, you guys just thrive on the fact that you're constantly the "lesser of two evils" choice. Afleitch admitting that he sways with the wind isn't exactly a kind reflection on your party, for that matter.

The LNF is... different. But both groups have many people I like and respect.

I wholeheartedly disagree I don't 'sway with the wind'; I compromise.

I support the minimum wage, but I would never have voted for the Minimum Wage bill as it stood. However it was amended in such a way that I was happy to vote for it. Likewise in the last session I came out in favour of the healthcare bill as soon as it was announced because that's what I believed in. I am centre-right, but very open to the welfare system and I vote for things in Atlasia that I would support in real life.

However; I have a radical streak. The issue is when to show it. As I said last week, the Senate as it stands is not welcoming to my personal belief that the poorest workers should be lifted out of the tax system, that tax cuts should be aimed at the poorest workers. You should be aware that I was very uncomfortable with sweeping tax cuts for businesses without cuts in personal taxation though I voted for the recovery bill.

However I was 'burned'. My tax cut bill was vetoed. My welfare bill was also vetoed and was reintroduced as diluted as it could be to satisfy the President. My belief in bank decentralisation led me to introduce the current banknote bill which doesn't look likely to gain much favour in the Senate and if it did would also be vulnerable to the Presidents veto. The current Senate and the current President is not as favourable to these things as I would like so alot of legislation I have drafted has been held back. No Senator want's a record full of 'burns'

I'm compromising because I'm not introducing as much legislation as I would like.

[opebo]

To Purple, I enjoyed your original post.  I've been thinking a lot about Atlasia recently, which I didn't really do before.  I guess its just because I've been more active in the Court, or rather that there have been more controversial cases at the Court (and the Court has become more controversial since recent appointments). 

I agree that there has been a pleasing rise in interest overall, and the rise of the PCP has to some extent invigorated appreciation of the JCP by its loyalists.  The DA, while having no appeal for me, does have a lot of personally productive and highly contributory members.  The LNF not so much. 

But regarding the centrism which dominates, I think its rather inevitable given the makeup of the electorate.

I just wish the LNF members would reform themselves - lampooning something which is just a game in the first place seems, well, pretty hollow work.  Come back to the JCP, guys..

[Alexander Hamilton]

I agree that there has been a pleasing rise in interest overall, and the rise of the PCP has to some extent invigorated appreciation of the JCP by its loyalists.  The DA, while having no appeal for me, does have a lot of personally productive and highly contributory members.  The LNF not so much. 

I agree with this.

I'm glad the DA made the decision to throw the middle finger to Master Jedi. All it did was make us stronger. Instead of being complacent, us Progressive Conservatives stepped up and got the ball rolling again. We became the largest party in Atlasia. I guarantee that would never have happened had we felt we could rely on DA votes. So it goes. What doesn't kill you only make the PCs stronger!

The game has basically come to two parties and whoever the people outside of those two bodies choose to support. That isn't to suggest irrelevance as much as inability to compete nationally.

[HappyWarrior]

I agree that there has been a pleasing rise in interest overall, and the rise of the PCP has to some extent invigorated appreciation of the JCP by its loyalists.  The DA, while having no appeal for me, does have a lot of personally productive and highly contributory members.  The LNF not so much. 

I agree with this.

I'm glad the DA made the decision to throw the middle finger to Master Jedi. All it did was make us stronger. Instead of being complacent, us Progressive Conservatives stepped up and got the ball rolling again. We became the largest party in Atlasia. I guarantee that would never have happened had we felt we could rely on DA votes. So it goes. What doesn't kill you only make the PCs stronger!

The game has basically come to two parties and whoever the people outside of those two bodies choose to support. That isn't to suggest irrelevance as much as inability to compete nationally.

Don't be proud of zombie voters Ham.  And we don't have an inability to compete nationally.  We have consistently outperformed our party which has always been like twice our size.