• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
By the way, if I had not promised to keep quiet about the ESRP/terror deal, I would tell all, and the face of EUtopian politics would never be the same again. But I am one to keep a promise; don't criticize me for that.
 

unmerged(1522)

Mostly harmless
Mar 4, 2001
240
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Jools
As the leader of the Conservative Coalition I play only an organisational role. The real leader is the leader of the Free Republican Caucass and you know that.
I know no such thing. Are you saying that the CC is trying to fool the voters, and that the people who are allegedly in charge of the CC are not, in fact, the ones who pull the strings?
Besides, you of all people should know who your party is dealing with.
That's a non-sequitur; if you're trying to imply anything, please have the basic courtesy to say so.
Your two faced negotiators have cooed in both the communists and the monarchists. Now that's an explosive and polarizing eutopian politics move.
With all due respect, that is a load of wombat droppings. Our negotiations with both the ESRP and the CRE have been open and above board from the beginning; both parties know where we stand - which is more than can be said of the CC. Once again, I'm mystified why it's an "explosive and polarizing move" if the RD negotiates with the CRE, but it's fine if the CC does the same thing. Sour grapes, perhaps?
 

unmerged(1522)

Mostly harmless
Mar 4, 2001
240
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Hajji Giray I
Maybe, but they have said that my platform is unacceptable. See how my platform and my party's are different? Wow, how exciting!
So, what you are saying is that you don't have the complete support of your own party and that your party is hopelessly fragmented; and yet, you expect citizens to vote for you and the CC. Tell me again how a fragmented party makes for good government.
Why not, if your views and those of the NP are so incommensurable?
2. I should have, but at the time I was busy with other [Real life] issues.
Too busy to make a two-minute statement? Too busy to say, for example, "I think JL was doing a good job, and perhaps we should elect him as party leader?" [OOC: not trying to exploit RL-issues here, so I won't pursue this any further, and I'll be happy to delete the above passage if you think it's inappropriate. :)]
3. Well, what party would I have joined?
You could have founded a new one - it's been done before. You could have joined the LP, or the MP (which *was* emerging at this time). You could have steered the FR away from a merger with the NP. All valid options.
The Moderates were not yet a party, and I could not run for any office at all as a monderate anyway.
So, it's all about running for office?
Or maybe you want me to join the RD...
Not really. :)
Mr. Langley can confess that he and I do not altogether like each other [in character, that is].
Quite honestly, I don't care one bit whether you like one another or not; that's a personal issue, and none of my concern. What concerns me is that you're cooperating politically.
If YOU were attacked like he was, YOU would have gone crazy for a while too.
I think an emotional response would have been natural under the circumstances, yes; I'm not sure the same can be said for an obviously, err, "unstable" one. I hope I would have had enough sense not to accuse the Right of staging a coup d'etat, not to claim that our Head of Government was caving in to terrorists, and not to demand the declaration of martial law.
But Mr. Jools is now a perfectly normal person and must not be accused of insanity.
Did I mention insanity anywhere in my previous statements?
That's a matter of opinion.
Ah. That makes it acceptable, yes? So if, say, an anonymous group posts fascist posters all over Eutopia, and I accuse the CC of being involved, that's okay because it's just a "matter of opinion"? If I say that the CC is solely to blame for the legislative standstill of last term, that's simply a matter of opinion? If I say that the CC is paving the way to a fascist takeover, that, too, is just an opinion? And if I say that the sun does, in fact, revolve around the Earth and that the heliocentric view is all wrong, that's perfectly alright because it's just a "matter of opinion"?

Frankly, all of these may be matters of opinion - but all opinions aren't equally valid, and some opinions have little basis in reality.
"Moderate" indicates your platform.
It also indicates your style of politics and your rhetoric; except, it doesn't.
My continued discussion of Mr. Murmurandus's lethargy and the ESRP's links to terrorism are not part of my platform.
Which links?
Okay, maybe that is a technicality, but look at the falsities in your reply to my speech. You can weave a fabric as well as I can.
Which falsities, precisely?
 
Last edited:

Craig Ashley

Prodigal Son
3 Badges
Jul 1, 2002
1.252
0
Visit site
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
posted by Mel.

I know no such thing. Are you saying that the CC is trying to fool the voters, and that the people who are allegedly in charge of the CC are not, in fact, the ones who pull the strings?

No effort to fool the voters, as anyone can see. The leadership positions in the CC are purely administrative. [OOC: Meaning Jools and I are available to check in frequently and handle the administrative tasks like editing posts, welcomining new members, and submiting tickets] The true decision making happens at the caucus level, and it is obvious to all that as it currently stands, the FR caucus is the larger of the two.

Quite honestly, I don't care one bit whether you like one another or not; that's a personal issue, and none of my concern. What concerns me is that you're cooperating politically.


Mr. Morgan and myself have personal and political differences. That is a no secret. But isn't it the idea of the party system like ours for people of different viewpoints to come together?

Besides your party is the one working with at best people who cling to failed and blood stained system, and at worst are violent terrorist-like revolutionaries. The Naitonalist faction is solidly right wing, but no one can accuse us of advocating the overthrow of a democraticly elected government.
 

unmerged(1522)

Mostly harmless
Mar 4, 2001
240
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Craig Ashley
No effort to fool the voters, as anyone can see. The leadership positions in the CC are purely administrative.
Presumably, your party constitution specifies that. No? Interesting. I pity the CC-voter who tries to figure out just who exactly is in charge of the CC; at least we seem to have established that its official leaders aren't. I can only conclude that public transparency and accountability are part of the radical Leftist creed the CC is so fond of railing against.

At any rate, one wonders whether the esteemed indivuals the CC has nominated for these elections, if elected, are the ones who will actually exercise the power the public has bestowed on them; or whether their role will be merely administrative as well, while the shots will be called by someone else behind the scenes.
The true decision making happens at the caucus level, and it is obvious to all that as it currently stands, the FR caucus is the larger of the two.
In other words, the CC hardly qualifies as a party: its members fundamentally disagree on policies, its leaders are mere strawmen, and its decision-making process is a disorganized mess. Yes, I can see how that would inspire confidence among the voters... My only hope is that this is not how you were planning to run the country.
Mr. Morgan and myself have personal and political differences. That is a no secret. But isn't it the idea of the party system like ours for people of different viewpoints to come together?
Forgive me for being old-fashioned, but I was taught there is a difference between having "different viewpoints" and finding each other's positions "unacceptable" (Mr. Morgan's term, not mine). The first is a sign of diversity characteristic of any healthy party, the second makes one wonder why the individuals in question would be in the same party in the first place.
Besides your party is the one working with at best people who cling to failed and blood stained system, and at worst are violent terrorist-like revolutionaries.
Would you care to identify those people?
The Naitonalist faction is solidly right wing, but no one can accuse us of advocating the overthrow of a democraticly elected government.
Describing the Nationalists as "solidly right-wing" is perhaps a bit charitable. As to the rest: nobody can accuse any of the registered parties of plotting a coup d'etat - at least if they are even remotely interested in factual accuracy. I'll take your word for it that the Nationalists aren't planning a revolt (not that you've extended the same courtesy to other Eutopian parties), but are trying to further entrench injustice, inequality, exploitation and marginalization by other means.
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Originally posted by Melanchthon
Presumably, your party constitution specifies that. No? Interesting. I pity the CC-voter who tries to figure out just who exactly is in charge of the CC; at least we seem to have established that its official leaders aren't. I can only conclude that public transparency and accountability are part of the radical Leftist creed the CC is so fond of railing against.

At any rate, one wonders whether the esteemed indivuals the CC has nominated for these elections, if elected, are the ones who will actually exercise the power the public has bestowed on them; or whether their role will be merely administrative as well, while the shots will be called by someone else behind the scenes.

In other words, the CC hardly qualifies as a party: its members fundamentally disagree on policies, its leaders are mere strawmen, and its decision-making process is a disorganized mess. Yes, I can see how that would inspire confidence among the voters... My only hope is that this is not how you were planning to run the country.
Oh, stop the nitpicking! This is a presidential campaign, not the CC headquarters!

Would you care to identify those people?
Currently I have a case being built against the ESRP. However, at the moment all the evidence is circumstantial (but rather compelling). I will wait until the evidence is solid before I present it in full to the High Court of EUtopia. [OOC: Hopefully before elections end. :) :)]

Describing the Nationalists as "solidly right-wing" is perhaps a bit charitable.
A bit.... :D
As to the rest: nobody can accuse any of the registered parties of plotting a coup d'etat - at least if they are even remotely interested in factual accuracy. I'll take your word for it that the Nationalists aren't planning a revolt (not that you've extended the same courtesy to other Eutopian parties), but are trying to further entrench injustice, inequality, exploitation and marginalization by other means.
Well, since Mr. Langley isn't running for president, I am, I'd reccomend this discussion be carried to the Nationalist Caucus of the CC or the CC itself.
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Speech to a Crowd at a Military Base

The military of EUtopia is in a pitiful state. The weapons are ages old, and the technology is pitiful in this modern world. In this state, the NATO [OOC: Or is it US?] base on our island is little short of a godsend. As president, I will try to see the technology and equipment of the EUtopian military upgraded to state-of-the-art, top-notch stuff. [Applause from eagerly listening soldiers.]

Somebody said that Malta could invade us if they wanted to. Well, as far as I know, Malta doesn't want to invade us--and neither does anybody else. Our military's goal should be to protect EUtopia from terrorism! Our fair country has fallen under a horrible wave of terror recently--the assassination attempt on Minister Jools, the salting of police cars (a non-murderous act of evil), and a lunatic fringe assassin attempting to enter the Conservative Coalition headquarters and, presumably, kill party leaders. Fortunately, the latter terrorist was caught, and I hope he lives through a long, long jail sentence.

But back on topic--the EUtopian military should only be strong enough to fight terrorism or a rebellion (which is a terrible but present possibility). However, this smallish army should be a top-of-the-line, superbly equipped, technologically superior one. We can make it an well-sized for our needs yet effective fighting force, with a little work and the right vote. Thank you.
 

unmerged(1522)

Mostly harmless
Mar 4, 2001
240
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Hajji Giray I
Oh, stop the nitpicking! This is a presidential campaign, not the CC headquarters!
So you don't care what's going on in your own party? :eek:

But since you're asking so nicely, I'll give you and Mr. Langley a rest. ;)
Well, since Mr. Langley isn't running for president, I am, I'd reccomend this discussion be carried to the Nationalist Caucus of the CC or the CC itself.
I had no intention of further pursuing a discussion with Mr. Langley in the context of your campaign. :)
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Speech in Hannover, EUtopia

(translated from original German)
Friends, EUtopians:

It is disturbing to me that President Murmurandus has hesitated to endorse the education of Norse and German in schools. He has said that the wide range of choices would hinder education and that an investigation was needed. This is a strange thing to say: variety worsens education? Who ever said that?

People with German heritage would undoubtedly like their traditions to be carried on by their children, and would love it if their children would have the option to learn German in schools. And the Norse, too, are included in this statement; they are a culture that sadly seems to be slowing, and the option to learn Norse in schools would benefit them greatly.

But the claim that variety may hinder educational standards is very strange indeed. A nation that speaks only three languages is not as much a 'melting pot' for all cultures to meet as one that speaks five; having more options enables children to in turn have more options in life; and foreign languages are known to be beneficial to all areas of education. So let's give our children the choice to learn not only French and Spanish, but German and Norse as well.

Thank you.
 

unmerged(4271)

General
Jun 6, 2001
2.161
0
(Reads back letter...)

Originally posted by Hajji Giray I

I thank you for your support and agree whole-heartedly on your stance with monarchy. I will bar any movement by my party to ally with any party wishing to pass rule of this nation to a single, unelected person.

(Overhears politicians outside their HQ as they head to BrewTOPIA....)

They speak of CC and CRE coalitions, a national referendum and a Monarchy Commitee to work on reinstalling the Royal Family and Monarch in the country.

(looks back at letter)


Politicians! So much for voting today, I think I'll head to the bar instead...
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Originally posted by heagarty
(Reads back letter...)(Overhears politicians outside their HQ as they head to BrewTOPIA....)They speak of CC and CRE coalitions, a national referendum and a Monarchy Commitee to work on reinstalling the Royal Family and Monarch in the country. (looks back at letter) Politicians! So much for voting today, I think I'll head to the bar instead...

IC: That letter was written days, weeks before my party even thought of the idea to ally with the CRE!

OOC: Well, I was hoping to re-appoint you as MHSA, but you don't seem to like me that much...:( ;)
 

unmerged(4271)

General
Jun 6, 2001
2.161
0
IC: Well, yeah, that's the point. I thought you were promising that you wouldn't let your party do that. It doesn't mean anything to promise not to do something if there was never any possibility it might happen, it only means something if you have the opportunity but stick with your promise.

I really like your platform, but it seems like your party isn't very supportive of the positions you've taken. That kind of worries me if you're expecting them to work for your agenda if you're elected.


OOC: Please don't take it personally, you have made this election much harder for me than it should be. I think my MHSA job is toast anyway, but thanks for the thought. :)
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Originally posted by heagarty
IC: Well, yeah, that's the point. I thought you were promising that you wouldn't let your party do that. It doesn't mean anything to promise not to do something if there was never any possibility it might happen, it only means something if you have the opportunity but stick with your promise.
OOC: What?????? No comprende!

I really like your platform, but it seems like your party isn't very supportive of the positions you've taken.
The idealist side of me says, what's right for my party may not be right for EUtopia [OOC: my ego tells me what I think is correct ;)], but the realist side says, you're right, where the heck are the votes going to come from?

That kind of worries me if you're expecting them to work for your agenda if you're elected.
(finishes note, more worried than before)

OOC: Please don't take it personally, you have made this election much harder for me than it should be. I think my MHSA job is toast anyway, but thanks for the thought. :)
I wasn't entirely being serious; however, I am in a quandary as to your position as MHSA. A certain anonymous person has given me pretty much the only chance I have in this race despite personal grudges, but now he requests I pay him back. I'm stuck between giving Anonymous what he has earned through hard campaigning, and giving you the MHSA for your superb skills at the job.

[OOC: How is the election harder for you than it should be? I'm confused again.]
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Well I suppose that the next 30 hours will decide this thing. Let us hope for the best. Everybody go out and vote; in this election your vote will make a difference. A crucial difference.
 

unmerged(11366)

Khan of the Crimea
Oct 21, 2002
2.038
12
bgreinhart.wordpress.com
Just another reminder:

GO OUT AND VOTE!