Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Free Speech

Day 594, 20:33 • Published in USA USA • by Serendipitous
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt (misquoted; first believed to be Winston Churchill. I'll do my homework from now on 😛).

With the ever so helpful war games, I have successfully ascended to a level of nominal importance. In doing so, I have been able to purchase a newspaper, the main supplier of gossip and propaganda. Because of this, I have taken a major step forward in this world.

Since this is the first article, I may as well make a point today. Some shall hate me, but others will not. Today I took part in an interesting debate, one of a topic that concerns me. I witnessed the President of the United States, Mr. Harrison Richardson, cleverly causing several party presidents of lower parties to submit. His interjections were commonplace, and his charismatic language led me to believe he is right. The issue being dealt with was having smaller parties pressure candidates to move from one state to another to receive several more backings. This is exemplified in the following:

Analysis: If Joe the Plumber were to run for congressman in Montana for the Nationalist Separatist Puritanical Party, and Joe Six-Pack were to run for congressman in Montana for the Double Fail Belittlement Party; both candidates agree on the same policies, and their parties are both backing their candidates. So, an idea, whether good or bad, bloomed. What if the parties pressured Joe the Plumber to move to South Dakota, and receive the backing of both the DFBs AND the NSPs? He could win the election, as could Joe Six-Pack in Montana, once he receives the support of both parties as well.

I sat on the sidelines and watched for the most part, and I saw that it had a kernel of truth in it. The reason for being so was that both candidates could win, and they could proceed to double team congress on a certain issue. Let's pretend it's military funding. So if the Joes decided to plant this idea into congress, and it passes, does this violate precedents laid down by former congressmen?

While this process works well on paper, it could never hold up in the real world. You bank on expecting the voters to vote for you, as well as other parties not raising too much of a fuss. But if you read between the lines, you see that what's happening is the election is being fixed. Not intentionally, but it's disrupting the main course of things. If Joe Six-Pack was determined the winner, then Joe the Plumber would concede and back down, resulting in only one person winning; surely then, you would have less power in Congress.

Conclusion: The ability to harness your voters to double the capacity of control you have over Congress is immoral because it violates precedent.

Reasoning: The violation of precedent, coupled with the uncertainty of the idea in the first place, is enough to place even the most unconcerned voters curious of your motives.

Impact: This plan can work only with smaller parties, because larger parties generally do not need the backing of states they have monopolies on. The problem exists only in smaller parties.

Real-Life Connection: This sort of issue can be tossed around the table and debated upon until someone gets aggravated and has too much fun. Kind of like the Zidane Headbutt debacle. (Not Really)

Thank you everyone! I promise my articles won't be so scientifically structured in the future! Vote it up! /end personal advances here



~Serendipitous

Your Faithful News Correspondent