DOUBLE DISSOLUTION

[Dr. MB]

According to Leinad's poll, a whopping 70% of you would prefer an end to the two-party machine system.

The easiest way to accomplish this, by far, is dissolving the two main parties. Labor and Federalist would be no more, leaving a void for multiple parties to pick up the ashes and remains. This has only been done once before, around 10 years ago, too long in the past for anyone in the game today (with a few exceptions obviously) to remember.

Should this be investigated more? Do you support a double dissolution?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Not happening

[Dr. MB]

Not happening

Sad how you can crush dreams with just two simple words.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For the love of god, is this really being dredged up again.

It doesn't work.

It took 8 months for us to end up in the same damn place, with one exception, the combination of Liberals and Labor had captured a bunch of ex-RPP moderates.

I am fine with existing in a four party or five party system with the Federalists as one of those parties. But I will not let another fing party be sacrificed at the alter of this top down attempt to restructure the party landscape.

The Federalist Party does not have, nor will it ever have, a dissolution procedure. If people want to leave the party, they are free to do so of their own choice. No one will force them. Not you MB, not Sestak, not Labor. NO ONE!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Leinad's Plan B option is not workable. It is two sets of extreme scenarios both of which have failed this game in the past. Replacing one with the other out of desperation is a recipe for disaster.

As long as you have discord, as long as you have DMs and as long as you have people on the right and people on the left, THEY WILL ALWAYS COALESCE.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Not happening

Sad how you can crush dreams with just two simple words.

When your dream can crush mine with the iron boot of the government fiat, IT DOESNT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXIST! Registration is a free choice that shouldn't be forced by someone else.

[thumb21]

If Labor is dissolved, I'll just join Labour.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I conceded to it last time, gave it a chance. Sacrificed so much that I cared so deeply about in this game and it failed. Why should I give up my freedom of association so you guys can learn the same lesson the hard way?

You want to change the party landscape, its called the registration thread. USE it! Grow some balls, ditch labor and its affiliates. But don't send the jackboots and the tanks to force me to change mine.

[Mike Thick]

We should have like five randomly assigned teams. No ideology, no friendships. Survival of the fittest.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

1. Create a poll with a bad idea
2. Give a rosy and imbalanced description of its "past use" that no one "remembers"
3. Link it on discord to create a steamroller effect.
4. Profit

Tale as old as time.

You forgot one little thing:

I never forget.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

The present system is fair. There is no need for other "parties" to win elections, as everybody has an equal opportunity to join Labor.

[OBD]

Sounds fun in practice but yeah everyone in Old Labor would just come back together and make another dominant left-wing party lol

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We should have like five randomly assigned teams. No ideology, no friendships. Survival of the fittest.

So you have invented a deneuralizer?

[Sestak]

We should have like five randomly assigned teams. No ideology, no friendships. Survival of the fittest.

SPOILER ALERT: Ted is putting himself on a team with all of Adam, MB, Peri, YT, and Doof. RIGGED

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We should have like five randomly assigned teams. No ideology, no friendships. Survival of the fittest.

SPOILER ALERT: Ted is putting himself on a team with all of Adam, MB, Peri, YT, and Doof. RIGGED

This joke is very informative. Even if you let all the problems aside and assumed arbitrarily redrawing the battle lines could be done, no one in their right mind would trust anyone on this list to actually stop.

That is exactly what transpired last time. The right stood down and the JCP machine took the game to the cleaners under a different name.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I support a permanent dissolution of all parties.
Having said that, if people actually want to change the party landscape, the Registration megathread is always open.

[Continential]

I'm honestly this is even close to leading tbh.

[YE]

This isn’t actually a solution but it was fun banter for a night based on what I just read on Discord overnight.

[Former President tack50]

I proposed this after the June 2020 election and saw Yankee as his most angry. I am happy MB has seen him too

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=379814.msg7419359#msg7419359

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=379901.0

Either way I am undecided about it; unless you dissolve all party servers and what not I fear the system would eventually coalesce. Also despite claims to the contrary, Atlasia is way more competitive now than it was a year ago. Call me when Labor proper has a 6-3 supermajority and is winning presidential elections with close to 2/3 of the vote.

I support a permanent dissolution of all parties.
Having said that, if people actually want to change the party landscape, the Registration megathread is always open.

For what is worth, as a compromise I did introduce in summer last year a "Non partisan elections" bill which failed spectacularly and got me tons of angry messages

The bill would have turned everyone's registration into "independent" and banned party labels from appearing on elections.

I am not sure if it would have worked but it would have served as a way for Yankee's fear of "party reformation" to not happen (at least de iure, I am sure we'd have de facto parties)

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=381525.0

[Lumine]

Personally I'm not a fan that the mere concept is vetoed and shot down every time it comes up, particularly since its been nine years since the last dissolution (with the player base so different only a handful of people experienced its specific dynamics) and yet the immediate assumption is that it would have the exact same results and we shouldn't even bother trying.

A moot point since it's just not happening, I know, but it won't be long before we reach a decade with the exact same two big parties.

[Continential]

Also, pre-dissolution, wasn't there an anti-JCP left at the very least which could create divides after that.

[Oakvale]

We should toss a coin. If the coin comes up heads, Labor dissolves. If it comes up tails, the Federalists dissolve. If it balances exactly on its side, there is a double dissolution.

I suggest that Adam Griffin and Windjammer be entrusted with ensuring the fairness and integrity of the coin flip.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Just grow some balls and leave Labor if you're bored with Labor.

[Leinad]

1. Create a poll with a bad idea

Nobody told me to make that poll, for the record. Nor did I link it on discord (although in full transparency it incidentally was). Nor did I tell MB to make this thread. Nor do I think dissolution is workable or (at least on it's own) even desirable. I just think it's an interesting discussion and it was kinda shot down in the offsite recruitment thread.

Also I said:

I suspect most of us will have a more nuanced answer than fits the question I'm attempting to ask. It's meant more as a jumping off point to discuss the pros and cons of "machine politics," in general. Perhaps we could also discuss "how to make the game better," although ideally that's a logically follow-up.

I don't really know how I could've made a more clear disclaimer

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Personally I'm not a fan that the mere concept is vetoed and shot down every time it comes up, particularly since its been nine years since the last dissolution (with the player base so different only a handful of people experienced its specific dynamics) and yet the immediate assumption is that it would have the exact same results and we shouldn't even bother trying.

A moot point since it's just not happening, I know, but it won't be long before we reach a decade with the exact same two big parties.

Because Lumine it is the height of folly to presume that you can force a change via gov't fiat to something that is natural and organic. People chose these parties for a reason, people keep choosing these party's for a reason. Of course it would be the same result all over again, but faster, because as a someone on the right, my interests lie with collaborating with other people on the right to achieve our mutual objectives. The same goes for most people on the left.

As soon as single conservative slipped through or even a center righty, the left would unify behind a single party with a machine organization. Likewise it would happen for the right as soon the left or center left was seen to have an upper hand.

This happened  for the left in 2011 with the UDL after the RPP won the Presidency, it happened with the right in 2012 after 3 landslide Liberal elections and prompted the creation of the Federalist Party.

Do you honestly think the partisan factors that drove this in the tea party era, have lessened in the era of Trump? They are worse!

So no, I have no interest in a suicide pact with Labor, because people are sick of labor always winning. If people are sick of labor always winging, VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. The reason labor keeps winning arguably is the same reason why this would FAIL.

SMASH THE TEABAGGERS TRUMPISTS!!!