NationStates

After a little bit of a breather, getting started with a new round of ideas. See if you can spot the politician referenced here.

[Name] A Doggone Shot

[validity] must have guns, television/internet, and elections

[description] Hoping to bolster his down-to-earth image in what has become a tight re-election race, rural politician Don Quizer's new television advertisement has instead proved divisive. Showing the legislator shooting at a pack of prairie dogs on his ranch, the commercial has drawn the ire of environmentalists and animal rights activists.

[option] "What an inappropriate display of animal cruelty," chides @@RANDOMNAME@@, calling in from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Everything's @@CAPITAL@@ headquarters. "How was this even approved for broadcast? Innocent animals were gunned down for political fodder, their deaths distributed all across @@NAME@@! It's a completely reckless message, one that will only encourage others to kill for sport as well. His bad judgement has gone far enough -- Quizer must withdraw from the race immediately!"
[effect] a hunting license is a political liability

[option] "That would only sweep the matter under the rug," cries Quizer's opponent @@RANDOMNAME@@, handing out campaign memorabilia to members of your office. "The voters must have their say, having the chance to soundly reject Quizer's messaging at the ballot box! @@LEADER@@, I ask that you personally endorse me in the race -- in this tight of a contest, it will make all the difference!"
[effect] @@LEADER@@'s endorsement can make the difference between a 1000 vote loss versus a 10 vote loss

[option] "What a load of carpetbagging nonsense," sneers Don Quizer, carefully polishing an antique shotgun. "You do realize prairie dogs are considered pests, right? Despite a population explosion of these critters over the past six months, my community's been left high and dry. And you're now going to criticize me for taking matters into my own hands? If you really want this issue to go away, just bring some law enforcement types out to my neck of the woods and cull the pack once and for all."
[effect] a new special taskforce has been named 'The Animal Firing Squad'

Why is Quizer have any supporters except himself?

Australian rePublic wrote:Why is Quizer have any supporters except himself?

Quizer is the incumbent, so I assume he had enough support to be elected the first time.

Any other comments?

A compelling story, to be sure. However, the debate progression feels off.

The debate appears to be arranged in an option / more extreme option / counter-option format, which is alright.

However, to me, option 2 isn't an escalation from option 1, it actually seems to be less extreme. Isn't a candidate withdrawing, or demanding that they withdraw from the race (Option 1) a more extreme outcome than simply endorsing the opposition candidate? (Option 2)

Candensia wrote:A compelling story, to be sure. However, the debate progression feels off.

The debate appears to be arranged in an option / more extreme option / counter-option format, which is alright.

However, to me, option 2 isn't an escalation from option 1, it actually seems to be less extreme. Isn't a candidate withdrawing, or demanding that they withdraw from the race (Option 1) a more extreme outcome than simply endorsing the opposition candidate? (Option 2)

Hm...I did the inversion on purpose due to how such a conflict might realistically play out. It also shook up the formula a bit. That said, let me think about it.

I tried rearranging the order on my end, but the narrative just didn't seem to come out smoothly. Keeping with the original structure for now.

Any other comments?

Last call.