A Political Platform Worth Considering
•
by FirstLaw
Presidential elections are right around the corner and it's all very exciting, to be frank about it. Very soon, presidential hopefuls will be presenting their best cases to us for our vote.
Now I'm quite certain that if Anna Semenovich were running, she'd be voted in on a heartbeat.
The rest of you have to work a little harder.
The eUSA has an emerging political party. The American Freedom Alliance (AFA) has pulled in a decent 46% of the vote in the last presidential election and has won plurality in the recent congressional elections.
Opposing parties have responded by forming a broad coalition to appoint a unity candidate (splitting votes among too many parties would hand victory to the AFA at their current level of popularity). However, their process in the last presidential election was plagued by perceived issues of fairness and lack of transparency. This "Unity Coalition" needs to get it right this time. They cannot afford to lose any votes.
If either party is looking for a way to tip the balance, might I suggest talking to this guy:
GloveisLove, had won the presidency only a few short months ago on a very simple premise:
Direct Democracy!!
For once, the two-clickers had a say on how the government would conduct itself. Direct Democracy was most manifested in our choices of which countries get invaded.
As a result, two countries got wiped. GloveisLove's idea certainly had it's detractors and it led to his impeachment, but it was an exciting couple of weeks for a two-clicker like myself. Under GloveisLove's leadership the game was played the way I feel the game should be played. We should be trying to conquer countries, if not, then the world. In addition, every foreign policy decision, alliance we join or MPP we sign should be with the express goal of expanding our influence.
Like Willy Wonka said, GloveisLove was on to something, it even compelled a medal hunter like myself to stop working for mercenary medals and start fighting for the eUSA!
Look, not everybody can get into politics in this game, or even want to. But they want to have fun nonetheless. The parties or candidates that give them that will win elections. Nothing else matters.
That's free advice.
Anna says hello!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
You'll get a lot of debate with the "direct democracy" idea, but in most areas, in this game, I agree with you in principle.
The T4 parties have chosen Cerb 3-to-1, and he will be the nation's Unity Candidate. I believe less than 100 people participated in those primaries in forums.
That said, we'll be holding a popular poll here startingtoday some time. I expect Cerb will win that as well, but there will be a couple other choices, including the WTP Primary winner, Joseph Dinero.
Voted.
Only about 100 Candor? Thousands vote in elections! Direct Democracy was only one idea that a candidate had that made the game a lot of fun for a couple of weeks. There could be other's. My point is that fun should be the main focus, and the candidates that keep that in mind will win elections.
"they want to have fun nonetheless. The parties or candidates that give them that will win elections."
Probably (should be) a true statement, since people play for fun to begin with. But that's not how elections are actually decided in this game really, and so we see a lot of unhappy players.
You realize the 'democracy' thing Glove tried was totally rigged, right? He made the decisions he was going to make anyway.
If you want to be fed a sh!t sandwich and have it called turkey on swiss, go ahead...but it seems to me that only leads to more problems.
Pfeiffer, if you don't understand that Glove successfully sold his message (that's all that matters in elections) then that's your loss and your opponent's gain.
Oh, I understand that, I'm simply saying that it isn't what you're saying. You're advocating for what was essentially, a load of bullshit, and calling it something else. Anyone who didn't see Glove for what he was deserved his crap, but it's different when you hold that up as some kind of virtue.
It worked didn't it?
"Direct Democracy" is only an example that was used to tap into voter sentiment and Glove effectively packaged it and put a bow on it.
Since that point two countries were wiped.
Since Glove's impeachment, we've given up regions and bonuses.
Results tend to speak for themselves
It's up to you or any other hopeful candidate to come up with something that will raise voter interest and make it your own. I can't do all your work for you 😉
Direct democracy rigged?
Nope.
Now don't be confused, I certainly had my own agenda, but I planned scenarios according to where the direct democracy vote was heading. Obviously the results were public, but my cabinet & I tallied results so we had at least a 24 hour notice before the public of where the next target was. Whatever the nation voted, would be selected.
Was direct democracy a tool used to gather the populist vote?
Yes.
Was direct democracy rigged?
Certainly not.
Don't listen to Henry, he's just butthurt that Glove actually won a real election.
Goddammit, I promised myself i was on vacation and wasn't going to comment on anything stupid. Crap. Pardon me while I go punish myself, repeatedly.
I'll help if you'd like BIa.
lol fluffer