(02-07-2017, 01:13 AM)Omega Wrote: Yeah, the endoswap deal was bad. I'm just going to say that right now. It should not have occurred however I do know for a fact that the APCRC has learned from it. The APCRC has learned that it was bad, it should have been done differently if done at all, we should have held our standard primary and we just overall messed up here. And I hope the current APCRC will learn from this and I hope the current and future leadership of both parties will learn that we made a mistake. The APC should have at the very least publically voted on the deal, which we did not do. The APC should have waited for the full slate of candidates to be announced which we did not do. And lastly, we should have held a primary (which we will hold now that Roavin dropped out). The deal was bad and as they say, hindsight is 20/20.
Edit: I do wish to point out that the APCRC did not see this in any way as rigging an election, though. I just want to stress that. No member of the APCRC saw this as rigging, we saw this as an act of bi-partisan cooperation. And every member of the APCRC never had any intentions of forcing our members to vote for who the party endorses.
Let's be clear, I don't think anyone had the intention of rigging an election. I think it's just the logical extension of endorsements when we only have two parties (and those two parties make up more than half the electorate).
(02-07-2017, 02:00 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote:
(02-07-2017, 12:09 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Do people even know they can start a political party?
One could make the argument that, while parties should be allowed and their continued existence permitted to the fullest extent, the formation of new parties, just for the sake of having a diversity of them, should not be encouraged (which isn't the same as saying they should be discouraged). If a group of legislators is sufficiently involved, chances are they already know parties exist and either will join one of the existing ones or form their own.
Beyond that, political parties are not the end all be all of regional politics. They are a useful tool for those who see benefits in better organising relationships or political positions that they have in common with others, but it is just as possible (and we have 14 years of history to prove it) to run an efficient government without parties.
I agree with that Kris, in theory, and that's part of the reason I never saw political parties as fruitful because a vast majority of the region is generally on the same page (as Seraph mentions below). But, there are factions currently pushing for things like RMB voting and such that could reasonably be another party.
Again, I'm just thinking aloud here, but if you're a newbie, do you know you can create your own party? Would things like a dispatch, a thread, a forum — help?
(02-07-2017, 02:27 AM)Seraph Wrote: Okay, so as the current Minister of Regional Affairs, rather than as a member of a political party (TIL, for those who aren't aware), I actually think that more parties might well be a good thing and that, as part of the various integration resources we have/are working on, some kind of mention of the possibility of joining or creating parties should be seen.
Maybe a re-structuring of the legislator apps is in order? Like, breaking out our long thread but also providing things like "Political Groups to Join"?
