Hi! MathNerd here! I will join the Educated party.
Remember when I said I alreadly signed you up in class? Yeah. Welcome to the brawl, and enjoy! Talk later.
I wish to join the Educated party
Sweet! Feel free to post, and debate all you want. That goes of you too, MathNerd
.
Well, coalitions are not about ideology or whatever; fundamentally, they are about the needs of the present and gaining power.
If the Martial Nationalists did not join our coalition, the mere fact that they got a small ammount of votes would mean that they would have no voice; since they did join, now they well get a say in how the country runs. If the MP and the LMP didn't join together, they wouldn't have won; since they won, they now get more power.
See what I'm driving at here?
Realpolitik means politics driven by practical considerations rather than ideology. Basically, national interest and pragmatism trump ideology every time.
I want to address this first. How did coalitions form? Why, they had similar ideas, and goals. The issue that we(speaking as the opposition) was that we believed that the CoD's parties are so unique and different, that there is no way that the parties involved will reach a definite compromise, for their agendas are so vastly different. Is diddling around, and doing nothing major, national interest? Is that pragmatism. No, its the idea of fools. And are you a fool? Is your coalition, which is barely able to agree on one issue, able to lead Britain to greatness?
Roman empire i believe. also i see your point...but the GW should not be a priority in the first place. building it in NA is the most logical choice, or in my opinion we shouldnt build it at all. Its main purpose in my eyes would be to protect our colonies in NA, or its a waste of production that could be used to promote growth instead.
This comes second. Honestly my first reaciton was, "Really?" From what I understand, by the time we get to the New World the GW will be gone. Rather, let's turn to the super continent, the Mainland Europe-Asia-Africa. If CoD, bunch of fools they are, are able to launch a settling fleet to France, and chop/build/whip the GW, that would be an achievement, that glistens in the sun, for them.
Plus since lighthearter only asks the president before each session, the advisors can be overruled. This is unlikely however since that would mean upsetting a party in most cases, and possibly provoking a reaction from the opposition.
And the only thing that will come from a mix of differnet ideals is the ability to work together. When we have 3 differnent parties pulling our presidents direction towards their views, there will be no choice but to find a compromise and work together if we wish to stay in office. It also means our rule over this country will be more balanced, then would a totally military one. It will be easier to please everyone.
And may i be the first to welcome Cull as our soon to be opposition leader. Although i disagree with the rule he is proposing, that would stop anyone from joining once an election is underway. I wasnt a new party, or even someone who was a major influence on events. I just arrived at the right time to swing votes in favor of CoD (has anyone else realized it stands for Call of Duty as well?) and became the turning point of the election. I presume that your rule would ban anyone that stumbles upon this thread in the middle of an election, preventing their voice from being heard?
The great wall is an issue here. Some say we should build it others say we shouldnt. Those who say we should disagree with where. I say we shoud but it must not end up being a priority as we have more pressing matters. But we should not place it in eurasia, but in north america to protect our newborn colonies that will be built there from the hordes of natives. Ragnarok and caesar are in europe right now. Why dont we let them deal with the barbarians? Let them trouble themselves! A simple normal wall in each city in europe should give enough defense for the ealy years. As for stonehenge, i support it as we need the happiness it provides.
And this is last. The first paragraph I can agree with, but the rest, ugh, let's start then. The second paragraph, is bull. Doubtlessly, the adviser from the party with the most votes will be the one most listened too. Will the Nationalists have their sway, and force men and women of all ages to fight dead-end wars, all for the so-called greater good of England? Will the LMP have the President's ear, or be the President, and further their own evil goals? Yikes. More balanced? No, just more corrupt, and insane. Find a compromise? A real compromise? No, just a heavily-biased one that favors the party with the President's favor at the time. Easier to please everyone? To answer that, is a corrupt, inefficient, boggled-down, weak government going to please everyone? Nope.
As for my idea, I still stand by it. The idea was that no new person could just walk in, join, and change the tide. They can still debate, and participate, just not vote. I thought I clearly conveyed that, but I guess not. We wouldn't ban them as you so
elegantly said. We believe Arya came in at a bad time, changing the once 50-50 chance into nothing for the First Coalition. The voting was supposed to end that very night! And you can say you just swung votes? Changing a tie, to a victory for one party in the very last hours? Of course that makes sense. What I am proposing is designed so that new members can do everything, BUT vote, as it would throw everything into disarray.
Pfft, the Americas. No, just no. Even by galley, if it even possible, then we would be too late. I say build TGW in the Super-Continent, and leave it at that. And walls in every city helping? They just increase defensive bonus, so 0 defenders still is 0 defenders, and 5 defenders is still better than 4 most of the time. I can understand your position on Stonehenge though.
-Cull
-Leader of the Opposition
).
