[PRIVATE] United Moderate Party HQ

[The_Hawk]

Personally, I'd like the P4P votes, but they don't bring much to the table. Particularly not now that the ESA was just formed with two of their members as prospective members. In fact, make it three -- Liep will follow Josephus. The remainder are shaky -- who knows how many votes they'll get come election day?

Is that worth the Vice Presidency? No. Speakership? No. A Ministry? I don't think so. Especially not since Kenny remains the weakest of our opponents. (In fact, if the attack dogs want to tear into his latest speech, it's ripe for it -- he pretty well tracks what I've set out so far as our approach to the military. Abolish draft? Check. A smaller army? Check. (That's not in their platform.) Increased pay? Check. (Neither is that.) Increased jobs through ENDTech? Check. (Increased subsidies are in their platform -- increased jobs aren't.) It screams 'borrowed'.)

Don't get me wrong -- I agree with a lot of what the P4P has to say politically (particularly the stuff they stole from us ), and there are some smart cookies over there. I for one would love to have Tulp as a Deputy MDIS. In fact, I have a perfect role in mind for him. But the price they ask is too dear, given how I rate their election chances.

 

[unmerged(10397)]

You know, the P4P has really gone out on a limb to ask us for alliance. If we say no, they can't really call us the 'corrupt old leaders trying to hang onto power' anymore, because that would make them the guys who would sell out to get in power with us. Their proposal is really win-win for us.

 

[unmerged(4021)]

Interesting thoughts John as I view their proposal as a lose-lose. If we take them, we have to give up positions we are qualified for with-out a substantial gain If we don't take them then they can accuse us of not really being interested in uniting Eutopia. The more I think about it, the more I like Jake's speech as a response to them.

-Jonathan Glasser

 

[The_Hawk]

If we don't take them then they can accuse us of not really being interested in uniting Eutopia.

I think it depends how eager -- or desperate -- they are to ally with us. If they're willing to negotiate and we still balk, then I agree, that can be used as ammo against us. On the other hand, if Tulp's offer is their final one, then we can easily laugh it off in the press as being pie-in-the-sky. VP AND Speaker for a fraction of the electorate? Frankly, the way things are going, they may have as much support at election time as PURE does now.

I do agree, though, that Jake's speech would be a good response. As I mentioned previously, I don't really see how it can hurt us.

 

[unmerged(10397)]

Only if we lose control of the situation, Jon.

I propose we basically go with Jake's speech. Tell the P4P we'd like to work with them to pass bills on the many issues we agree on, and we will consider their members for Ministry positions just like we would be willing to consider any skilled candidate, but that given their campaigning so far this election, we do not consider a formal alliance as a feasible option.

This way, we've shown that we are willing to work with others, but we haven't promised to give up anything.

 

[Amric]

Did they REALLY ask for VP, Speaker, and full ministry positions? If so, the answer is no. Simple as that. They, as some others have pointed out, don't bring much to the table to be considered for ANY of those positions. Deputy Ministries, yes. In fact, I believe I mentioned on the boat about Tulp as having something to do in the MDIS ministry.

I like Jake's speech in response. Working together in the GA is all to the good, but Kenny is in no position to DEMAND anything, even if it is through Tulp. I don't know if the proposal is directly from Tulp or an bunch of people together with Kenny desperate for power, any kind of power he can get.

I guess I need to check out his speech first though...

 

[Craig Ashley]

So it seems the concensus is go with my speech. I'll give a few more hours to post any objections, and then I'll post it.

 

[Amric]

I've just seen the CRO's election announcment. We have a deputy leader? Who is it? Plus we will need actual nominations and acceptance for President and the GA...We'd better get to work on this since the time to get it in is the 16th...which is only 3 days away.

 

[Estonianzulu]

I nominate Amric Al'Aeshir to be the UP party candidate for President.

(that work?)

 

[Amric]

<OOC:There might actually have to be voting in this thread for the actual nomination to work. I don't know, to be honest.>

 

[Craig Ashley]

All, right, lets make this quick and easy. (OOC: I don't think we need to vote on the nominations, people just need to post that they accept the nominations)

I nominate the following individuals for the GA ticket: Glasser, Talbott, Langley, Vilms, Al'Aeshir, Tilly, Wellsford, Sova, O'Floinn, and (OOC: Green Alien, I forgot your IC name but you're nominated as well). I propose the order in which the individuals were nominated be the actual rankings on the ticket. Please post there to confirm you nominations. If you do not post here, you will not be a part of the ticket!

I also second the nomination of Amric Al'Aeshir as our presidential canidate (not technically required, but it sounds nice). Amric, just indicate your willingness to accept this nomination.

As to a party deputy, the original plan was for either the President or the Speaker to be the party leader and for the deputy leader, which would've been me, to run things day to day. I'm currently the party leader since Amric passed on it. So I'm going to just appoint a deputy leader for now, and we can shuffle things after the election if we wish.

Jonathan Glasser, do you accept your appointment to deputy leader of this party?

Just to be formal, I accept my own nomination to the GA ticket.

 

[The_Hawk]

I accept my nomination, third Amric's nomination, and confirm anything else that needs to be confirmed.

Sheesh, the Gall government sure created a messy bureaucracy overnight, didn't it?

 

[unmerged(24249)]

I humbly accept my own nomination.

(OOC: my IC name is Michael Marine)

 

[Amric]

I accept my party's nomination as our candidate for President.

BTW, I believe I stated earlier<IE, two days ago> that I would like to NOT be on the GA list. As the last time I resigned a NA seat it was a nightmare to get someone in at the time. I would prefer the GA be able to get off and running at full speed. So therefore, I will decline my nomination for a GA seat.

Also, I have received a personal communication from Mr. Johnston of the ESA, the fellow the ET interviewed recently. He was wondering what the view of the UP is on his new party. I thought it would be best to bring this up to everyone so I can inform him more effectively.

Plus, we aren't slowing down our campaigning, are we? Well, I'm not, but the rest of you have kind of slowed down somewhat, I think.

 

[The_Hawk]

Plus, we aren't slowing down our campaigning, are we? Well, I'm not, but the rest of you have kind of slowed down somewhat, I think.

Well, I know I have. I can't speak for anyone else, but with the NEC dead and the other parties relatively ineffectual in their campaigning at the moment, it's hard to get one's hackles up.

Still, I'm hoping this AFSF thing will be a good opportunity to get my plans for reform out. I'm going to see if I can't get it simulcast on TV or radio.

 

[Craig Ashley]

OOC: I'm purposely having Langley lay a little low right now. We're better off if we focus on issues. Langley's slash and burn style is best given in small doses. I'm thinking about a second "MERL" speech, but I need to have some specific proposals to make. I'm working on it.

IC: Amric, we won't face the same problems with replacing you. The new constitution, if I am reading it correctly, allows party chiefs to easily replace GA members. No requirement to follow the list, if you resign, I would just pick the next person.

If you don't want a spot on the GA ticket that is fine, but most Presidential canidates prefer to have a slot as a back up in case they don't succeed in the big election. Its your call.

As to the ESA, their not on my radar at the moment in terms of campaigning. We're not competing for votes, so there is no need to attack them unless they come at us. I mean few if any voters are debating between the ESA and the UP ... we're pretty far apart on most issues.

I'm open to some sort of non aggression deal, and if they have any capable people, I wouldn't rule them out of government - though I would keep them away from the economy and law enforcement. I would be opposed to giving Josephus a post in the government if we won the election. He's a cancer to any administration he as "served" in.

 

[Amric]

The latest Loop Poll is out. Looks like the Unity Party has 26 percent of the vote for the GA...with P4P having 16 percent as our chief competitor in the GA elections. Now there is still 32 percent undecided, which is kind of enormous! And apparently it will be the last Loop Poll prior to the election. So I have to say that so far we've done an excellent job, folks! We've captured the lead in the GA elections. Well done!

I also saw what Josephus Sergei said on our campaign trail. How do you believe we should respond?

And those who have NOT affirmed their nominations as GA members need to do so as soon as possible. We must have our party completely ready to have it recognized for the GA and Presidential races.

 

[Craig Ashley]

I've replied, but feel free to step in if you wish, Amric.

 

[Amric]

Jake, I'd prefer not to be on the GA list. If I do not win the Presidential Election, so be it. To be honest, I'm not very interested in being in the General Assembly. My time in the national assembly and the lack of activity there left a bad taste in my mouth, if you know what I mean.

You also make a good point about the ESA...plus I am wondering about the P4P, now that Josephus has officially moved to the ESA...

 

[Estonianzulu]

I accept my nomination.