GraVandius
Retired Troll
- Pronouns
- His Majesty
ERI Poll: Region Divided On Private Polls, Disapproves of EO
Pichto is just the worst!!! Just kidding
I support. I hope it sticks around for at least a few elections.
We've already had a trial run and it was fine
I'd like to see a trial run on a more significant election than the Senate by-election, which didn't really show ... anything.
I have bigger concerns about making Senate elections private than FM elections. I'd like a test of an FM election.
For the FM election -- sure, private ballots, but for the Senate elections - no
I don't love this idea, but I've been willing to implement it on a trial basis for other elections. Except for Senate elections; it doesn't make sense to have private results when you also need to decide the number of seats. I'm not sure its a good idea for a run-off, either.
It should've been done for the next election only as another test.
Honestly, I'm torn. On one hand, this could help up and coming, newer individuals running for office - but, on the other hand, this could ruin the excitement of an election. I think the pros and cons are equal, and in the end this will achieve nothing, which is why I neither oppose or support it. I just don't see the point of it. In runoff elections however, I think it may make slightly more sense, but at the same time, I don't necessarily think it should be used in one election without the others.
Calvin waited until the last second to destroy his legacy.
I don't think the first example was clear and am still pretty neutral towards the idea, but I like the sentiment behind it
I support. I hope it sticks around for at least a few elections.
We've already had a trial run and it was fine
I'd like to see a trial run on a more significant election than the Senate by-election, which didn't really show ... anything.
I have bigger concerns about making Senate elections private than FM elections. I'd like a test of an FM election.
For the FM election -- sure, private ballots, but for the Senate elections - no
I don't love this idea, but I've been willing to implement it on a trial basis for other elections. Except for Senate elections; it doesn't make sense to have private results when you also need to decide the number of seats. I'm not sure its a good idea for a run-off, either.
It should've been done for the next election only as another test.
Honestly, I'm torn. On one hand, this could help up and coming, newer individuals running for office - but, on the other hand, this could ruin the excitement of an election. I think the pros and cons are equal, and in the end this will achieve nothing, which is why I neither oppose or support it. I just don't see the point of it. In runoff elections however, I think it may make slightly more sense, but at the same time, I don't necessarily think it should be used in one election without the others.
Calvin waited until the last second to destroy his legacy.
I don't think the first example was clear and am still pretty neutral towards the idea, but I like the sentiment behind it
and people who are confused/don't know what they are talking about.Executive Orders are a tool in the First Minister's tool-chest that in recent history has been reduced to jokes and inconsequential changes. I'm glad to see Calvin stepping up and implementing policy he believes in, even if I'm not 100% sold on the policy itself.
This is the second EO that the First Minister has used. Two in one term is not a lot, which is why I support this Executive Order. However, I think more than three in one term would be a bit worrying, so as long as the First Minister does not reach that number, I'm fine with it.
Calvin is just the worst!!! Kidding again
If the Senate won't shake things up and experiment, I support a first minister willing to put effort into new ideas through EOs.
The power is his to use, and the Senate has an oversight role when an EO is issued. Future FM's also can simply remove it if they campaign on that issue and win on removing it, so I don't see it as some massive overreach of power.
Slightly oppose, particularly given his indication that he intends this to be a permanent measure.
The EO thread lays it out much more clearly, but the short answer is that this was an overreach and perhaps an overreaction.
EOs don't get etched in stone. Lighten up.
This feels like a pretty serious perversion of the spirit of the Executive Order
If the Senate won't shake things up and experiment, I support a first minister willing to put effort into new ideas through EOs.
The power is his to use, and the Senate has an oversight role when an EO is issued. Future FM's also can simply remove it if they campaign on that issue and win on removing it, so I don't see it as some massive overreach of power.
Slightly oppose, particularly given his indication that he intends this to be a permanent measure.
The EO thread lays it out much more clearly, but the short answer is that this was an overreach and perhaps an overreaction.
EOs don't get etched in stone. Lighten up.
This feels like a pretty serious perversion of the spirit of the Executive Order
Make HEM great again!!
I hope they decide to let this play out and not just knee-jerk veto it.
The Senate should definitely veto it at some point, although I'd be happy for it to stay in place short-term to provide a proper trial run of an election with a private ballot.
The Senate absolutely should veto the EO, primarily because I frankly think adding Senate elections was a mistake, but they should also do so in good faith. A discussion should be had.
Making this change permanent and in the format it is was bad.
Again, I'm torn. Whilst I think it's important for the Senate to discuss this, I think that we should wait for this to play out with the next First Minister election, and then see public opinion on the issue. If public opinion is negative afterwards, then they should go ahead with vetoing it.
I hope they decide to let this play out and not just knee-jerk veto it.
The Senate should definitely veto it at some point, although I'd be happy for it to stay in place short-term to provide a proper trial run of an election with a private ballot.
The Senate absolutely should veto the EO, primarily because I frankly think adding Senate elections was a mistake, but they should also do so in good faith. A discussion should be had.
Making this change permanent and in the format it is was bad.
Again, I'm torn. Whilst I think it's important for the Senate to discuss this, I think that we should wait for this to play out with the next First Minister election, and then see public opinion on the issue. If public opinion is negative afterwards, then they should go ahead with vetoing it.
Pichto blah blah blah
cash in on the controversy
Pichtonia is the worst FM all year, terrible leadership.
[comment about Pichto here]
No spelling mistakes! Good boi GraV
N/A
cash in on the controversy
Pichtonia is the worst FM all year, terrible leadership.
[comment about Pichto here]
No spelling mistakes! Good boi GraV
N/A
Also I'd like to commend all the comedians in the comments for the Whitmark jokes. All 5 of you are original and very funny