We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Another Election, Sure Why Not?
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic National Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill requests an early election. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline. Elections will be held immediately if the bill passes.
Voting deadline: January 2557
Description[?]:
| Sure why not? |
Proposals
Article 1
Arrange early elections as soon as this bill passes.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:39:54, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | Why would we do this? At least a pretence at a reason would be nice..... |
| Date | 21:41:13, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Marxist-Separatist Front Of Meria | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | Are you angry because you have lost mor than 90 seats? |
| Date | 21:44:11, April 04, 2008 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | We are unconvinced...but will support, once. |
| Date | 21:44:35, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Democratic National Party | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | "Are you angry because you have lost mor than 90 seats?" You mean like the left-wing were mad when they kept calling elections and people kept giving massive support to the CLP? "Why would we do this? At least a pretence at a reason would be nice....." Just all these cabinets flying around... we felt there's a lack of decision. We have a hung parliament - let's give the people a chance to fix it. It's a bit of a laugh too. |
| Date | 21:47:03, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | How would an election fix the problem of incompatible cabinet offers? If anything - wouldn't it just add the potential for new offers, if the dynamics shift a bit? We don't really have a hung parliament at all - what we DO have is a cabinet with 7 vacancies. It would be better to fill a slightly-less-than-half-full cabinet in almost ANY manner, than to send the populace back to the hustings -again. |
| Date | 21:51:28, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Democratic National Party | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | We think an election might result in better value offers being placed with regards to cabinets. |
| Date | 21:54:55, April 04, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Another Election, Sure Why Not? |
| Message | Unless the only parties that gain a real number of seats are the artists and JIHAD? In which case, the complexion remains pretty much untouched. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 498 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 168 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers." - Ralph Nader |