Alphawolf
Basileus, Founding Father
How should deputies be appointed/elected? Any please post your opinions.
Informational (non-binding)
-the Wolf
Informational (non-binding)
-the Wolf
Gloriana said:I say the runner-up should become deputy, uncontested election or no.
Actualy, the difference between contested and uncontested election is that: Contested elections have two or more canidates running while an uncontested election only has one person running.Gloriana said:I say the runner-up should become deputy, uncontested election or no.
I agree, its better to have a deputy and minister to work together, not creating wars against each other...Donovan Zoi said:The deputy should be appointed. Why should an election winner be forced to choose his electoral adversary to be his assistant? This is a poor outcome for both parties involved. In most instances, the winning candidate will choose the runner-up from his own accord, especially if that person is a newcomer that didn't get a fair shake at the polls. However, the winner should not be forced to do this by law.
Appointments lead to elitism? Hardly. But a runner-up deputy mandate leads to unrepresentative democracy. We want political parties, but now we wish to force them to work together? Make up your minds, people!
EDIT: Why aren't these polls public?
Donovan Zoi said:EDIT: Why aren't these polls public?
CivGeneral said:Actualy, the difference between contested and uncontested election is that: Contested elections have two or more canidates running while an uncontested election only has one person running.
These elections will have more than just 2 people running in them, it is rather unlikely that anyone will get a *majority* of votes.Man'O'Action said:I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the concept of someone that the majority of the voters do not support being placed in a position of responsibility to help some one that deputy opposes.
I think you are seeing these as two canidate races, they are not an election could comeout something like this:This seems like the antithesis of representational government. At the very, very least they should be elected independently, but somebody that is voted down by the electorate should not be rewarded with a position of responsibility.
This seems like the antithesis of representational government. At the very, very least they should be elected independently, but somebody that is voted down by the electorate should not be rewarded with a position of responsibility.
Of course you could take this a step further by taking ANOTHER vote for deputies, which could easily change the outcome as all the people that voted for A can now vote for someone else, but I think the results from the first vote are strong enough not to have to take another vote. Also, it would seriously slow the game down as you can only have deputy elections AFTER all ministers have been decided on.