Smokin' Poll

Common-Sense Politics

Audentes Fortuna Juvat
Deputy Minister
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
Pronouns
He/Him


Over a period of 23 hours just before a general election for the presidency was called, 31 Europeians were polled. Let's get right to the results. Trends, where applicable, are shown in parentheses.

How satisfied are you with Writinglegend's performance as president?

Very Satisfied - 3.2% (-28.6)
Somewhat Satisfied - 54.8% (-8.8)
Unsure - 25.8% (+21.3)
Somewhat Unsatisfied - 12.9% (+12.9)
Very Unsatisfied - 3.2% (+3.2)


The President's numbers continue to slide and for the first time during his presidency, dissatisfaction is explicitly expressed. Even so, the majority of Europeians maintain at least tentative support for his job performance. After three consecutive terms, this is no small accomplishment. While it is true that satisfaction has noticeably decreased as his time in office has wore on, it is also true that his numbers have never represented widespread opposition to him and his government. He's just finally come back down to Earth.

How satisfied are you with Calvin Coolidge's performance as vice president?

Very Satisfied - 12.9% (-9.8)
Somewhat Satisfied - 38.7% (-6.8)
Unsure - 29% (+10.8)
Somewhat Unsatisfied - 16.1% (+2.5)
Very Unsatisfied - 3.2% (+3.2)


Calvin's numbers have traveled a similar trajectory with less significant movement. In the past it was hard to make the case that these results represented any threat to Calvin's future prospects for the presidency but it may be safe to assume now that three terms of bland numbers going the wrong way have done just that. He's failed to impress in this role for quite some time.

How satisfied are you with President Writinglegend's executive and judicial appointments?

Very Satisfied - 6.5% (-25.3)
Somewhat Satisfied - 48.4% (-6.1)
Unsure - 32.3% (+32.3)
Somewhat Unsatisfied - 9.7% (-3.9)
Very Unsatisfied - 3.2% (+3.2)


There's some major movement here. Two months ago, reaction to WL's appointments were far more positive. Note the large move between 'very satisfied' to 'unsure'. While these numbers generally reflect apathy, they don't express outrage.

What is most important to you when considering a presidential candidate?

All of the Above - 41.9% (+28.3)
Record - 19.4% (-12.4)
Activity - 19.4% (+5.8)
Platform - 16.1% (-20.3)
Other Responses - 3.2%


Once again, no big winners on this question. Tickets and campaigns must be well-rounded. In the future it may be more helpful and informative to allow respondents to rank their priorities.

What issue do you view to be most important?

Foreign Affairs - 45.2% (-0.3)
Recruitment/Retention - 45.2% (+8.8)
Culture - 6.5% (+2)
Communications - 3.2% (+3.2)
Military - 0% (-9.1)


The trends on Europeians' top issues haven't changed much over the past two months but looking back further, recruitment and retention numbers have nearly doubled since July and for the first time, foreign affairs is legitimately rivaled. Candidates will be forced to address both issues thoroughly in the forthcoming contest.

Which individuals would you encourage to run for president?

Drecq - 71% (+21)
Kraketopia - 65% (+15)
Common-Sense Politics - 58.1% (+8.1)
Calvin Coolidge - 48.4% (+7.4)
Malashaan - 48.4% (-1.6)
Trinnien - 48.4% (+21.1)
Mousebumples - 45.2% (-0.3)
Ninja Kittens - 25.8%
Writinglegend - 23% (-45.2)
Netz - 9.7%
Kaboom - 3.2%
modernsin - 3.2%
Polling Booths - 3.2%
r3naissanc3r - 3.2%


I'll remind our readers that this question does not tell us who will win but rather who probably has enough support to launch a viable bid for the Goldenblock. It's the popularity contest, more or less. The big winners this cycle are clearly Drecq, who emerges as a big-time frontrunner, and Trinnien who has skyrocketed from long-shot status to a credible candidate. Kraketopia also remains a potential frontrunner while CSP leads a second tier including Calvin, Malashaan, and Mouse. If an insurgent candidacy is to be realized, it likely comes from Ninja Kittens. Finally, our results clearly show that there is very little enthusiasm for another WL term.

If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Kraketopia - 58.1%
Calvin Coolidge - 41.9%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Kraketopia - 58.1%
Common-Sense Politics - 41.9%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Kraketopia - 58.1%
Drecq - 41.9%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Malashaan - 61.3%
Kraketopia - 38.7%


Krak enjoys a solid and constant level of support in a hypothetical contest with all major candidates until he comes to the sitting Speaker, who beats his handily.

If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Kraketopia - 74.2%
Writinglegend - 25.8%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Common-Sense Politics - 61.3%
Calvin Coolidge - 38.7%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Drecq - 54.8%
Calvin Coolidge - 45.2%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Malashaan - 64.5%
Calvin Coolidge - 35.5%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Calvin Coolidge - 67.7%
Writinglegend - 32.3%


Our Veep doesn't win a single head-to-head except one against his current boss. This is a match-up he was unable to make any headway in until this point. The bad news is, everybody else beats WL too.

If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Drecq - 51.6%
Common-Sense Politics - 48.4%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Malashaan - 61.3%
Drecq - 38.7%


Again, Drecq is very strong (though he has a close run in with CSP) until Mal comes in to crush his dreams. If Mal were to run, he may be unbeatable.

If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Drecq - 71%
Writinglegend - 29%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Malashaan - 61.3%
Common-Sense Politics - 38.7%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Malashaan - 71%
Writinglegend - 29%


If the election were held today, who would you be more likely to vote for?

Common-Sense Politics - 71%
Writinglegend - 29%



We've learned a great deal, on balance, here. The Age of Writinglegend is over, in no uncertain terms. Faced with a credible challenger, he wold be unable to win an unprecedented fourth consecutive term. In fairness to him, it's unlikely he would desire to seek one anyway. Calvin has failed to establish himself as a natural successor during his time on the bottom of the ticket. CSP's numbers are strong enough but likely has more to prove in order to defeat another heavyweight. Malashaan, Kraketopia, and Drecq have positioned themselves to have the best chance at an electoral victory but it is clear, I think, that Mal leaves pure devastation in his wake should he choose to launch a bid. Trinnien now has enough support to be a viable candidate for president, the first of his generation to distinguish himself as such.

This polling and subsequent analysis does not seek to disqualify any potential candidates, included or not. I used my own personal judgement and included anyone I viewed to be a serious candidate based on a number of factors. Anybody has a chance here. We've proven that before.
 
This was really cool and fantastically done CSP. I love how you show the changes from your last poll. The one thing I question however, which actually has nothing to do with your polling is the emphasis Europeians think they place on foreign affairs. There have been very few if any moves recently by Europeia on the world stage. In fact, I was recently writing an article that I was going to call "Splendid Isolation", based upon the notion of Britain's own splendid isolation. I don't really think Europeia needs or wants (at least the general populace or so I thought) to be doing risky things abroad when it could simply enjoy it's own community. It's always seemed to me that Europeia has always required a minority of individuals to push the inertia towards to doing something in foreign affairs. This would not be a bad thing. So I am quite shocked that so many people want this.
 
I talked about this on one of the EBC Radio shows I did yesterday (don't ask me which one ... they all blended together for me, to some extent), but I ranked Recruitment & Integration as my #1 priority because without those two things, you don't have any people or any bodies to do anything. I don't discount that FA is important, but a lot of our power in the ERN (for example) has come from Kraken's amazing recruitment and training programs for the Navy, as we have a solid naval force that is miles ahead of where it was before.

I'm sure I'll have disagreement from some here (and the timing is such that I'm not sure I'll be able to respond and counter-argue in a timely manner :/), but if you don't have a solid recruitment and integration program, it's hard to build anything else within the region on top of that.

Anyhow, thanks for the polling, CSP, and I look forward to seeing where this particular election takes us.
 
Rach said:
This was really cool and fantastically done CSP. I love how you show the changes from your last poll. The one thing I question however, which actually has nothing to do with your polling is the emphasis Europeians think they place on foreign affairs. There have been very few if any moves recently by Europeia on the world stage. In fact, I was recently writing an article that I was going to call "Splendid Isolation", based upon the notion of Britain's own splendid isolation. I don't really think Europeia needs or wants (at least the general populace or so I thought) to be doing risky things abroad when it could simply enjoy it's own community. It's always seemed to me that Europeia has always required a minority of individuals to push the inertia towards to doing something in foreign affairs. This would not be a bad thing. So I am quite shocked that so many people want this.
This is really insightful and valuable feedback, Rachel. You make some excellent points here and I'm glad you raised them. For me, I depend on a president to execute effective foreign policy as he's generally the only one who can in the absence of a strong and omnipotent shadowy figure such as r3n or NES. We've been without that figure for some time and that's a distinction that is important to note if we're evaluating the importance of this issue in terms of presidential politics from a historical perspective.

I don't view an emphasis on foreign policy to be a preference for sticking our nose in every pie or "doing risky things abroad" but rather the desire to be willing and able to make the most of opportunities as they arise and to employ strategies for long-term success on the world stage. When we do these things well, we attract more and better members. There isnt a large pool of candidates who can accomplish these things where there is one of people who can successfully innovate our recruitment and retention efforts. The same is true for Culture which should arguably get much more support than it does in these polls.

I prioritize FA ahead of all other issues -when considering potential presidents- because that I view it as a the primary prerogative -of that office-. In terms of overall regional priorities, yes, FA would be over represented when viewing these numbers. Interior and Culture would probably move past FA in that context though I do reject the notion that we can remain who we are by retreating into ourselves under the sort of model Albion at least talked about in recent months not do I think it would be beneficial for us to forego our place in the world as the preeminent UCR to focus inward.
 
Very well-done analysis, and a great read. These numbers are pretty much consistent with the other polls that have come out, so it looks like our "frontrunners" are set, and it's up to everyone else to make this election interesting. :D
 
Interesting poll and analysis indeed.
Common-Sense Politics said:
r3naissanc3r - 3.2%
Heh, as a matter of fact, back in February, I was planning on running for President right after Mouse's term (and my term as VP) ended. I had written a platform and was considering whom to approach for VP - WL and Kraken were on the shortlist, and at least a couple of others whom right now I do not recall. I was also planning to run for two terms, something that I emphasized in my platform: a lot of the plans I laid down were long-term development and strategic goals that would need two terms to fully materialize. I am fairly confident that I would have no trouble winning an election and reelection.

Unfortunately, RL got in the way very unexpectedly, and I was not able to run, or even finish my VP term for that matter. Such is the cruelty of fate (well, not really so cruel, given that the reason I could not run was that I got a bunch of great job offers in RL, but anyway :p ).

Right now, my running for President is just completely unrealistic.
Mousebumples said:
I talked about this on one of the EBC Radio shows I did yesterday (don't ask me which one ... they all blended together for me, to some extent), but I ranked Recruitment & Integration as my #1 priority because without those two things, you don't have any people or any bodies to do anything. I don't discount that FA is important, but a lot of our power in the ERN (for example) has come from Kraken's amazing recruitment and training programs for the Navy, as we have a solid naval force that is miles ahead of where it was before.

I'm sure I'll have disagreement from some here (and the timing is such that I'm not sure I'll be able to respond and counter-argue in a timely manner :/), but if you don't have a solid recruitment and integration program, it's hard to build anything else within the region on top of that.
I think this is a misleading way to frame the issue. In part, the fault lies with ambiguity in CSP's question.

"What issue do you view to be most important?"

Is that asking, if I had to completely abandon everything else and only pick one area, which one it would be? Or is it asking which area is currently underperforming and is in need of improvement? Or even, is it asking which one do I consider the most important with respect to the role of the President specifically? Or, another alternative, which of these am I going to emphasize when voting for President next election?

If it's the former, the Mouse is right. If we were to select a singular focus for the region, it should be recruitment and integration, because without that the region can't survive. But in all other cases, Mouse's answer is barely applicable.

Right now, we are doing great in recruitment. Integration is somewhat lacking and needs improvement, but it is still very functional - certainly not a dire situation. Both areas have been performing at worst satisfactorily and at best amazingly for at least three years now. In foreign affairs, however, throughout most of 2015, we have been seeing a steady decline in our position, capability, and influence. And this strongly contrasts with our trajectory the previous three years, when we rose to become the most potent UCR and one of the most influential regions overall in the game.

To make the problem worse, the reasons for our decline are numerous and critical, instead of just one issue we could try to alleviate. There are a couple of cases in the past year where we committed serious blunders - we basically shot ourselves in the foot. But it's not just these two serious incidents, which we could attribute to inexperience or a one-off wrong judgment. There is a general lack of strategic planning. There is a serious shortage in information inflow. There is a large deficit in utilizable social capital and a near complete absence of strong, working interpersonal relationships with the larger diplomatic sphere.

The other thing to take into account is that fixing foreign affairs is a much longer-term prospect than fixing recruitment and integration. A couple of bad terms in recruitment and integration can be undone by one great term. A couple of bad terms in foreign affairs take at least a year to fix - and we've had more than two bad terms. This is not meant to imply that recruitment and integration are "easier" than foreign affairs - without being too modest, I am among the best in the entire game in both areas, and I know that that's not true. It is merely a consequence of the fact that, whereas recruitment and integration are locally contained, foreign affairs is global (it involves agents, friendly and hostile, in other regions and is affected by many more circumstances outside of our control) and largely driven by interpersonal relationships.

CSP makes another great point that complements the above, with respect to why people would pick "foreign affairs" over "recruitment and integration" in the above poll. Recruitment and integration can be overturned by a Minister, or even non-Ministerial Interior staff - Mouse, Mal, and I have been contributing to that area for years without having any official capacity, and so do the several dedicated recruiters we are fortunate to have like GraVandius, WL, Cool Spring, Seymour, shufordbrian, or Sloosh (apologies to our other manual recruiters - there are just too many to list them all!). On the other hand, in our current political climate, change in foreign affairs can only come with strategic planning and decisive action from the President directly.

Rach said:
This was really cool and fantastically done CSP. I love how you show the changes from your last poll. The one thing I question however, which actually has nothing to do with your polling is the emphasis Europeians think they place on foreign affairs. There have been very few if any moves recently by Europeia on the world stage. In fact, I was recently writing an article that I was going to call "Splendid Isolation", based upon the notion of Britain's own splendid isolation. I don't really think Europeia needs or wants (at least the general populace or so I thought) to be doing risky things abroad when it could simply enjoy it's own community. It's always seemed to me that Europeia has always required a minority of individuals to push the inertia towards to doing something in foreign affairs. This would not be a bad thing. So I am quite shocked that so many people want this.
I'd say that your assessment, that Euro has been neglecting (or taking negative action in) foreign affairs is accurate for most of 2015 - I said the same earlier in the post. It is, however, completely inaccurate for previous years. I do not know whether you meant to have your comment apply just to 2015 or previous years as well. I'll assume you only meant 2015, but if you didn't, I'll address that in a separate post.

I think the isolationism model you describe is alien to our regional identity. And the fact that, in all our polls over the years, Europeians consistently emphasize foreign affairs and express interest and concern for the regional direction in that policy area is strong evidence of that.

If I were to pick four identifying elements for Europeia, they would be a thriving community, organized democratic politics, a drive for excellence, and active interaction with the greater gameplay community.

All four of them are essentially independent of each other. We can drop our commitment to organized democratic politics and remain a thriving community with active foreign affairs. We can similarly drop active foreign affairs in favor of isolationism, and survive as a very active community where we run our own political simulation without contact with the outside world.

There is ample evidence that the latter approach is feasible. It is (to a large extent at least) the approach 10000 Islands has taken for half a decade now. It is also the approach Albion seems to have chosen recently. I am sure Europeia would also not just survive an isolationist approach, but would continue to do very well internally. It just would not be Europeia anymore.
 
I would love to see a r3n presidency. If you ever decide that you do have the time definitely run.
 
Imagine where we'd be if r3n had been President instead of me. I apologize in advance for disappointing you.

As usual, I can't disagree with r3n, and, in this case, I must take my personal share of the blame for an all-but-nonexistent presidency in regard to foreign affairs, especially when I thought we were off to a strong start. My inability to really do much of anything halted any/all progress we had been making on specific projects, and subsequent inaction didn't help. I also regret that mixlr, a great innovation on our part and something that excited the international community, fell into disrepair when it had such great potential for building bridges.

What remains unspoken of are the factors that we had little control over. The decline of TNI and imperialism in general, the LKE recruitment scandal, and the loss of historic allies such as Kantrias. While isolationism doesn't describe where we are, we lack the same tight-knit group of powerful allies we once enjoyed.
 
Drecq said:
I would love to see a r3n presidency. If you ever decide that you do have the time definitely run.
Sign me up to be a foot soldier in the r3ntatorship.
 
I was going to make a joke about choosing between a r3ntatorship or a theocratic empire under the banner of Nethel, but let's be honest: be it myself, Nethel, or anyone else, r3n would be the one pulling all the puppet strings.
 
A r3n Presidency is something I (and anyone with any sense) would get behind. He already runs half of Euro. :p
 
R3n said:
I'd say that your assessment, that Euro has been neglecting (or taking negative action in) foreign affairs is accurate for most of 2015 - I said the same earlier in the post. It is, however, completely inaccurate for previous years. I do not know whether you meant to have your comment apply just to 2015 or previous years as well. I'll assume you only meant 2015, but if you didn't, I'll address that in a separate post.
I believe it is completely accurate for most years. Our "Broad Foreign Policy" was written to establish Europeia in foreign affairs and in particular allow Europeia to play a greater role in foreign affairs. I strongly remember how underneath President Earth, the drive to getting ourselves to play a role abroad was seen as necessary. The movement that led to establishing the EAC and the Broad Foreign Policy did not come out of thin air. It was in response to the lack of action Europeia had abroad. Previous allies such as Unknown during this period for example felt that it was Europeia's responsibility to follow -it's- lead.

To me, it has always felt like a bit of an battle against a tendency to prefer isolationism even if this tendency is not named.

R3n said:
I think the isolationism model you describe is alien to our regional identity. And the fact that, in all our polls over the years, Europeians consistently emphasize foreign affairs and express interest and concern for the regional direction in that policy area is strong evidence of that.
I completely disagree for the reasons I stated above. The EAC and even EAAC struggled heavily and were highly controversial at their inception. But they were considered to be a solution to the FA "problem". Others such as PhDre had other ideas when it came to what Europeia should be doing to get Europeia moving in the broader world. It has -always- been a battle to get Europeia moving on foreign affair issues. There is definitely a preferred state of taking less risks.

How many programs have there been in Europeia dedicated to increasing the public awareness of foreign affairs? Tons. Underneath my term, there was a conscious effort to get people talking about foreign affair events in the Grand Hall but obviously such projects did not result in a great change. This is not a bad thing, but my point is that people like yourself, NES and myself among others in Europeia who can and have pushed for a very active Europeia in foreign affairs are in the minority.

Without the influence of a minority of people from the early days of the EAAC, Europeia would not have had future Presidents who continued to partake in foreign affairs to a greater degree than prior to it. Even with this change and pushing factor, you yourself has stated that 2015 has seen a more isolationist approach.

Perhaps Europeians want a greater focus on foreign affairs, but it always seems that a minority is having to push. For example, was Europeia participating during the creation of Balder more of a Europeian thing or more of a Rachel thing? Was this really something the Europeian community as a whole would have done? I guess it is leaders who push for these things but it truly was more of an oddity than the norm in my opinion.

R3n said:
If I were to pick four identifying elements for Europeia, they would be a thriving community, organized democratic politics, a drive for excellence, and active interaction with the greater gameplay community.

All four of them are essentially independent of each other. We can drop our commitment to organized democratic politics and remain a thriving community with active foreign affairs. We can similarly drop active foreign affairs in favor of isolationism, and survive as a very active community where we run our own political simulation without contact with the outside world.

There is ample evidence that the latter approach is feasible. It is (to a large extent at least) the approach 10000 Islands has taken for half a decade now. It is also the approach Albion seems to have chosen recently. I am sure Europeia would also not just survive an isolationist approach, but would continue to do very well internally. It just would not be Europeia anymore.
The last one, I don't think is a Europeian element. It is something that has been adopted by various leaders, but it is not one that I think is intrinsically Europeian. When I look at our greatest achievements, or what people think they are it is always about internal affairs. HEM's speeches for example are nearly always about the internal successes of Europeia. It is our democracy, activity and community which are the hallmark of the region. Military and foreign affairs, while amusing and sometimes great side activities are always inherently secondary.

This is not a bad thing at all. It is this internal focus which allows Europeia to continue to thrive and continue to contemplate endeavours such as foreign affairs and military.
 
Back
Top