Dishonest RUMP statement.

[E.S. Bornatfiglheu]

Ending the politics of hate...

The thing is, all too often, in the Western liberal tradition, (r)evolutionary tactics are tagged as hatred. In other words, we will all play nice. And since we are all playing so nicely together, it would be a shame to upset the sandbox. So lets change nothing. Make sure nothing moves. We shall leave the sandbox precisely as we found it. But we can all play and everyone will be much happier, I assure you.

But is the RUMP really contorting to try and come to a campaign statement that is acceptable to the other parties? Really? If your ideological flexibility is that great, disband for gods' sake and found a party (or several) that stands for something aside from being buddies with particular folks.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

May 12, 2015 9:33:31 GMT -6 Glüc da Dhi said:

Again, change your 50 word statement. Its not fair play.

May 13, 2015 20:25:33 GMT -6 E.S. Bornatfiglheu said:

But is the RUMP really contorting to try and come to a campaign statement that is acceptable to the other parties? Really?

Well, damned if you do and damned if you don't, I guess.

[E.S. Bornatfiglheu]

May 13, 2015 20:53:33 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

May 12, 2015 9:33:31 GMT -6 Glüc da Dhi said:

Again, change your 50 word statement. Its not fair play.

May 13, 2015 20:25:33 GMT -6 E.S. Bornatfiglheu said:

But is the RUMP really contorting to try and come to a campaign statement that is acceptable to the other parties? Really?

Well, damned if you do and damned if you don't, I guess.

There is that.  Please some of the people some of the time but all of the people none of the time.  But I'd rather see a RUMP that says, essentially, "Darn tootin' this is what we stand for.  All y'all aren't solid on the monarchy.  Prove to me otherwise!" 

[Ian Plätschisch]

The MRPT and PP have proven that we are solid in our support of the monarchy.

That is what this entire thread has been about.

The MRPT says in their manifesto "We support the hereditary monarchy." 

The RUMP changed their statement not to be buddies with everyone, but because the original was a lie.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Well, no. Our original statement was entirely true, as I have discussed here. The MRPT suggests reducing the political power of the monarchy and make it easier to dethrone the monarch, in order to make the monarchy more acceptable to Talossa's republicans. That's a perfectly fine position to take, and there's nothing wrong with trying to appeal to voters as the moderate monarchist party that's willing to reduce the institution to placate republicans... but I'd hardly call it firm support of the monarchy! It's certainly some kind of support of the monarchy, I'll grant you that.

I entirely understand that you might be unhappy with that and consider any support of the monarchy to be "firm support," but at this point you should also be able to see our perspective. It's hardly helpful or reasonable to still be suggesting we were being untruthful.

I changed the statement because the new one is just as true, but the slight change makes it less aggressive, and it seemed like a reasonable request.

ESB, you're gently mocking a policy of making small changes to try to help build comity, but I assure you: it's no fun to play in a sandbox that some people treat like a litterbox.

[Ian Plätschisch]

From what I can tell, we are going around in circles. The MRPT is more willing to make changes to the monarchy than the RUMP, I think we can agree on that.

With both our positions clear, I think we finally can stop arguing about it

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

it's no fun to play in a sandbox that some people treat like a litterbox.

The ironic thing is that this is being said by the politician responsible for laying the most turds. This is pure psychological projection.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

May 14, 2015 14:35:31 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

it's no fun to play in a sandbox that some people treat like a litterbox.

The ironic thing is that this is being said by the politician responsible for laying the most turds. This is pure psychological projection.

talossa.proboards.com/post/130434

[Ian Plätschisch]

May 14, 2015 14:41:38 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

May 14, 2015 14:35:31 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

The ironic thing is that this is being said by the politician responsible for laying the most turds. This is pure psychological projection.

talossa.proboards.com/post/130434

Even so, I still think it is rabblerousing to unilaterally declare that the RUMP will "end the politics of hatred."  Even if this is an actual problem (of which I'm still not convinced), I have yet to see how the RUMP plans to go about solving it.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

"Rabblerousing?" It's campaigning, and pretty mild campaigning, too! As we reach out to voters, we'll make the case to them.

[Ian Plätschisch]

May 14, 2015 14:54:16 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

"Rabblerousing?" It's campaigning, and pretty mild campaigning, too! As we reach out to voters, we'll make the case to them.

I suppose you are justified in not explaining to me what exactly you mean.  It is up to the voters, after all...

But still, how is the RUMP any more qualified than the other parties at stopping political hatred?  Wouldn't that be something that would need to be worked out by all parties?  If you were one of the only parties to have this as a priority than OK, but I don't think any party is in favor of increasing hatred.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I don't think it would be useful to try to convince you, thanks though! Be assured that no one, here or anywhere, is declaring that any party is in favor of "increasing hatred." But at this point, I want to speak more directly to voters about this sort of thing. It seems pretty much given that you're going to vote for the MRPT, and you're unlikely to agree with me that the RUMP is fantastic, no matter what arguments I marshall.

While these sorts of discussions can be illuminating, motivated reasoning ensures that there's a limit to how helpful they're ever going to be. If this is something that people want to bring up in a debate, that might make sense, but otherwise I'm going to save my energy for speaking to voters.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

May 14, 2015 15:36:11 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

 and fending off the nasty attacks that are doubtless soon on the way.

This is ending the politics of hate?

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Lol, let's not start clutching our pearls at every little thing! I just had like eight people pile on me for our 50-word statement, after all, some with really harsh language... not much of a stretch to anticipate some more! But fair enough, it's gone. Sorry if it offended you... be assured that it is definitely my fondest wish no one will say anything nasty!

[Gaglhen Fortaleça]

Interesting... I haven't been a member of Talossa for long but I thought that the MRPT and the RUMP worked together for the most part