Re: Office of PSOL—Beginning of the Institute of Atlasian Progression

[AustralianSwingVoter]

The claim that it would harm third parties is also false. We are right now in an One-and-a-quarter party state. It is clear that the current system is geared to be worse then the FPTP situation in the USA for third parties, what with the easy deaths and absorption of opposing parties. Even the current major third party, the ACP, is merely a group of more organized federalists that ended up overtaking the larger party into relevance. It is merely a dominant faction. If using a 5% threshold of votes to get a party into the hypothetical parliament, based on registration, it would be 12 votes, one and most of  another voter less then what it took to get representative Louisville Thunder elected. So with a few votes less, it should be quite possible for a third party to have an easier time. For a possible regional third party, it’s even easier.

A 5% threshold would result in 20 seats in total. In case you hadn't realised. And if a parliament stayed at the current 9 seats then you'd still need 10% of the vote to get a seat.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

An officeholder defecting isn't something new, nor should it be treated like some stain against democracy.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

An officeholder defecting isn't something new, nor should it be treated like some stain against democracy.

The people were supposedly electing a candidate with the backing of L/P. This is a stain of democracy given the circumstances of a professional conspiracy by the right.

No, the people elected West Midlander. An elected official is in no way bound by law to their political party.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

An officeholder defecting isn't something new, nor should it be treated like some stain against democracy.

The people were supposedly electing a candidate with the backing of L/P. This is a stain of democracy given the circumstances of a professional conspiracy by the right.

No, the people elected West Midlander. An elected official is in no way bound by law to their political party.

This. I can see the case for wanting Westy to resign and stand in the special election, Vern style (and I'll be honest--I wouldn't be *that* upset if he did), but he's under no obligation to do so.

That's definitely the chivalrous course of action. Though of course West is under absolutely no obligation to actually do so.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Now that I have more background on why WM left, I can safely say that I do understand why he did what he did. Labor does have a more centralized identity based on the loyalty and work of several powerbrokers who don’t like disloyalty or even unpredictable styles of play. I can say from experience that the Labor bureaucracy and I have gone toe-to-toe at numerous occasions. I was censured initially after leaving the government in Lincoln after the Establishment^TM would let a member of the Federalists into laborcord then the new admitted labor member SNJC. So too was resistance present in letting in bp1202, or when I was denied a house seat over the question of my loyalty by the party heads. The party is at times unfair and slow, but the pendulum swings toward justice. I got SNJC and bp1202 eventually in, I came back stronger then ever by becoming an ideologue in my time in the Fremont parliament, where I could do mostly whatever due to the party needing politicians. I even am apart of the councils of the new president, the same who along with YE denied me a house seat, and am expected to be elected to the house in April no matter what.

Let’s compare this record to what happens in the Right. Lakigigar was screwed over numerous times by the Feds even though he was an opposition candidate and a Fed member. Bagel23’s Faustian pact with the Feds was not enough to guarantee him a house seat. On the right; there are goldbugs, racists, and tried criminals in office or members. This is not a stable, trustworthy party worth your time or allegiance to my guy. Labor has its problems, but the solution is to point it out and work to fix them, as I have done and arguably have won in the long run. It is not to go to the right where you frankly don’t belong. Come home West Midlander, I and everyone else will forgive you and treat you no different the sooner you come home. You don’t even need to go back to being in labor, an Indy registration would be enough. You have so much power at your disposal in the South, it’s time to make the right decision.

You confuse inability/incompetence for intentionally screwing someone over.

It is easy to say "Labor did this, this and this" while Feds fail to do this, that and the other thing, but you forget the underlying backdrop that Labor controls a majority of the votes in this game either directly or indirectly and that means they have the power to deliver results favorable to their desired outcome in most every circumstance.

We don't have the same luxuries to deliver votes. When Laki ran for House, several of us voted for him until we ran out of votes. Because duh, we are the minority. If we had the votes to win a majority, he would be in the House and the controlling vote on legislation. When Bagel ran for CoD as part of a slate, we did our best to GOTV for him until we ran out of votes because three of the "recruitment wave" people didn't show up. If Bagel had wanted to run for House, he would be on the slate now. Perhaps you might have missed a certain thread begging people to run for office?

Labor is great at the spoils system because they have reduced the game to merely marching out the soldiers and have that down to a well oiled machine, meaning they don't have to worry about 3 new people not showing up, or someone going offline randomly just before the election only to come back on Monday and say "My bad!". For them they can substitute, we need every vote.

You will never understand what it is like over here.

Just quoting because I can't recommend it twice. This fantastically sums up Labor's inability to understand the difference between them and the Federalists.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Now that I have more background on why WM left, I can safely say that I do understand why he did what he did. Labor does have a more centralized identity based on the loyalty and work of several powerbrokers who don’t like disloyalty or even unpredictable styles of play. I can say from experience that the Labor bureaucracy and I have gone toe-to-toe at numerous occasions. I was censured initially after leaving the government in Lincoln after the Establishment^TM would let a member of the Federalists into laborcord then the new admitted labor member SNJC. So too was resistance present in letting in bp1202, or when I was denied a house seat over the question of my loyalty by the party heads. The party is at times unfair and slow, but the pendulum swings toward justice. I got SNJC and bp1202 eventually in, I came back stronger then ever by becoming an ideologue in my time in the Fremont parliament, where I could do mostly whatever due to the party needing politicians. I even am apart of the councils of the new president, the same who along with YE denied me a house seat, and am expected to be elected to the house in April no matter what.

Let’s compare this record to what happens in the Right. Lakigigar was screwed over numerous times by the Feds even though he was an opposition candidate and a Fed member. Bagel23’s Faustian pact with the Feds was not enough to guarantee him a house seat. On the right; there are goldbugs, racists, and tried criminals in office or members. This is not a stable, trustworthy party worth your time or allegiance to my guy. Labor has its problems, but the solution is to point it out and work to fix them, as I have done and arguably have won in the long run. It is not to go to the right where you frankly don’t belong. Come home West Midlander, I and everyone else will forgive you and treat you no different the sooner you come home. You don’t even need to go back to being in labor, an Indy registration would be enough. You have so much power at your disposal in the South, it’s time to make the right decision.

You confuse inability/incompetence for intentionally screwing someone over.

It is easy to say "Labor did this, this and this" while Feds fail to do this, that and the other thing, but you forget the underlying backdrop that Labor controls a majority of the votes in this game either directly or indirectly and that means they have the power to deliver results favorable to their desired outcome in most every circumstance.

We don't have the same luxuries to deliver votes. When Laki ran for House, several of us voted for him until we ran out of votes. Because duh, we are the minority. If we had the votes to win a majority, he would be in the House and the controlling vote on legislation. When Bagel ran for CoD as part of a slate, we did our best to GOTV for him until we ran out of votes because three of the "recruitment wave" people didn't show up. If Bagel had wanted to run for House, he would be on the slate now. Perhaps you might have missed a certain thread begging people to run for office?

Labor is great at the spoils system because they have reduced the game to merely marching out the soldiers and have that down to a well oiled machine, meaning they don't have to worry about 3 new people not showing up, or someone going offline randomly just before the election only to come back on Monday and say "My bad!". For them they can substitute, we need every vote.

You will never understand what it is like over here.

Just quoting because I can't recommend it twice. This fantastically sums up Labor's inability to understand the difference between them and the Federalists.

Then that’s on you and others for not creating an environment that allows you to attract and maintain voters. Why is it possible for us to hold the likes of Pyro, Peebs, SNJC, Jimmy, Wulfric, Pericles, among others in one party with minimal problems while no viable right leaning or centrist coalition of parties are able to form?

Well they're all fundamentally left-wing. And in the same way the Federalist/ACP manages to hold together all the players who are fundamentally right-wing.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Lincoln is undeniably a bit more complicated given its geography. If any region actually should change its capital to be more pertinent culturally or infrastructure wise, it should be Lincoln. NYC is its own world all on its own, and placing the capital there is not very balanced in my view. Places like Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, or even Syracuse and Buffalo would be a better placement then NYC.

Philadelphia would work very well as the most historical city in America. Certainly somewhere in Pennsylvania would seem like the most balanced location for a capital. The centre of Lincoln's population should be somewhere in PA, and culturally Pennsylvania also fits as a bridge between different regions (it isn't called the Keystone state for nothing). Pittsburgh is a bit too Midwestern and although Harrisburg could be developed into a more independent capital it is a bit small.

Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis Cincinnati would be very ill suited as a regional capital. They're far too midwestern and very unbalanced compared to the region. Syracuse and Buffalo are a bit small and aren't the most central but there's definitely an argument for them.

While we are on the subject, I wouldn’t be objecting a decision to contruct Atlasia’s own Brasiliera somewhere in the more middle parts of the nation. Nyman is just too far away East to be a proper capital, even though it is thoroughly developed. Although it’s my least of concerns. Maybe create a new region in central Illinois or Iowa. Maybe even in Yeet, Iowa perhaps?

Fairest solution would be to construct a new capital on the tripoint of the three regions. So around Keokuk, IA. On the banks of Mississippi, right in the heart of middle america and very good geography for development.
Though if we wanted to put a new "central" capital in an established city then St Louis is the obvious choice. Closest to both the mean centre of US population and the tripoint of the three regions, an old city with strong history as the gateway between the east and the west. Plus it's a very good size, big enough to handle becoming a capital but not so large that it has it's own strong unique cultural bubble that could overpower a sense of national unity.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

ASV, with all due respect, the fact you're suggesting St. Louis as the new capitol shows you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Anyone who has been to St. Louis and knows the region would know how terrible of an idea that is.

Oh yeah St Louis is a pretty terrible city nowadays. I'm only suggesting that historically and culturally there's a strong argument for St Louis.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Recently, parliamentarian ASV said openly that he’d be directing preferences in the upcoming race against me. I’ll say this once folks, a vote for me is a vote to trigger ASV. #PSOL2020  #A••hatSurelyVents

Who knows if I have any actual power over what happens, who knows what my chaotic opinions will result in on election day, and why would you possibly expect the preferences of the "right-wing" candidate to flow to you, the avowed socialist/wacky leftist.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

This is all you need to understand why you lost.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Hence the Philly Plan has been an unmitigated disaster that only worked when Peanut ran the government as a de facto first minister; one need only observe the string of failed and ineffective chancellors to understand why selecting the head of government by and from the legislature is a terrible idea.

Maybe one day someone will actually do something to fix the mess that is Lincoln's current government!

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I love parliamentary systems. The problem is that Atlasia is not real life, 90% of legislators have no initiative, and government by committee inevitably leads to nothing getting done. As a practical matter Frémont needs a strong executive to keep the gears turning or parliament would quickly become impotent and ineffective. Hence the Philly Plan has been an unmitigated disaster that only worked when Peanut ran the government as a de facto first minister; one need only observe the string of failed and ineffective chancellors to understand why selecting the head of government by and from the legislature is a terrible idea.

Well not exactly, as in the case I described the powers of FM would just go to the Speaker and would be decided exactly the same. This way, the curse of lesser evilism is reduced completely and would empower the voters into being impactful.

I think the best way to empower the voters is to let them chose the head of government directly, but perhaps that's just me. Practical experience disproves the first part of your paragraph, but we won't let facts get in the way of a good story, as Yankee likes to say.

If only we could let sock-puppetry slide in this one specific instance

[AustralianSwingVoter]

As of right now, I’m handing in my resignation as chair of the Green Party, effectively dissolving it.

Unfortunately, at this point you have no authority to appoint yourself. It's also questionable whether you would had the Green Party stayed intact, considering the vacancy is due to a deregistered member of no current party.

Lakigigar deregistered as a green member so his replacement is still appointed by the Greens party chair.