My unimportant view.

Day 2,024, 02:35 • Published in Australia Australia • by Ranger Bob

Hello

So here we are at election time.

I have to say, at the outset of this election round, be it for good or ill I was a bit excited.



We had three pretty strong candidates, each (at least in my mind) slated to bring in some REAL differences of opinion.


Majester.

The stalwart of many terms in eAus politics. Can probably quote collectively more terms and roles than a bunch of country blokes could down in equivalent beers in 6 hours solid drinking.

But, also perceived (by some) as a more behind the scenes operator. I am not in any way implying there has been no communication - but, compared to others not necessarily inclined to douse the media with heaps of articles, nor expect cabinet or his staff to do so either.

TJ/Mark Mick G.

The agitator. MarkMick/TJ Norton is and has been, a very...polarising.... force in eAustralia politics. While I accept and appreciate he subsequently withdrew, I read all the claims around stuff that happened, people paying people, not paying people, deals and the like, I felt like I was going to BE in an episode of underbelly.

Needless to say, for both entertainment value, and, the fact I actually don't mind the guy personally (though many do!) I was dissappointed when he withdrew.

Molly Jo

Probably the most wet behind the ears in terms of eAus political background, but the rise to fame has been most interesting to watch. Not only founded a party but saw it take off, and has almost OCD level of communication right now...

But, also to an extent polarising in terms of both some of the views, and some of the lack of views (which, might I add is the sign of a good politician that recognises there is not a point in making hard promises on some things as you actually have to suck it and see).

----

So what do I think?

Majester

I have to say, in Majester's defence he did post a lot of stuff during the APP preselection process on the forum. Some of it does give you a sense of his views.

BUT, I for one am dissappoint. The true trick to a good CP is strong leadership, and communication. I think Maj HAS both of these traits, but hasn't in this campaign walked the walk and actually shown this.

He _should_ have done articles. He _should_ have appealed to the masses. There is only so much I've been X time dCP, Y times CP, Z times in Cabinet and over a slab's worth of Senator one can rely on, in an ever changing game. If you don't maintain brand relevance with the younger kids...



YOU LOSE THE MARKET SHARE.

Economics Marketing 101.

Molly-Jo

Molly Jo obviously has good advisers from a political and running perspective, and this is coupled by a most excellent display of political nous.

Her campaigns have been in your face.

They come across as real - and while people disagree with, or don't feel there is enough substance, to some of her platform (see comments on ADF/Military, NaN but for 2 examples) - HER CAMPAIGN HAS BEEN SMART, and RAISED BY THE LACK OF REBUTTAL OR ALTERNATIVE ARTICLES.

My personal jury (ie what I think) is out on some of the policies. I'm still a swinging voter on a few of the views on alliances (not because I don't get the argument about TWO and NaN, but because I think as I recently said on the forums, we need to stop sleeping around for a while and actually jump somewhere to STAY. I don't want to be an eRepublik Slut.)

But I don't begrudge alternate views, nor do I think she has been non-sensible in putting these notions forward in her campaign.

Not because of Molly - but overall, I have to say I was very disappointed in how this election has turned out. After last month's non event, I really was expecting something GOOD!

Anyway...

So the true question this comes down to is:

Do you vote for someone whose policies you may not agree with but seems active, or the person who is not coming across as active but has indicated they probably HAVE differences in policy you might agree with more.

THIS ELECTION, I AM VOTING FOR...

Comment Deleted

Ranger.