by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:19 am
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:26 am
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:32 am
Belmaria wrote:You've already been invited to a coalition with the NWP and two other parties, which would have more electoral strength. This is unnecessary.
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:34 am
Britanno 2 wrote:Belmaria wrote:You've already been invited to a coalition with the NWP and two other parties, which would have more electoral strength. This is unnecessary.
This thread is really just a formality - a Labour-NWP coalition has practically been in place (in an unofficial and temporary capacity) since the first round of the presidential vote. I don't know about my fellow Labour members, but personally I'd rather negotiate an agreement with the NWP before talking to other parties. Labour and the NWP seem like the most natural partners.
by Nariterrr » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:38 am
Britanno 2 wrote:Belmaria wrote:You've already been invited to a coalition with the NWP and two other parties, which would have more electoral strength. This is unnecessary.
This thread is really just a formality - a Labour-NWP coalition has practically been in place (in an unofficial and temporary capacity) since the first round of the presidential vote. I don't know about my fellow Labour members, but personally I'd rather negotiate an agreement with the NWP before talking to other parties. Labour and the NWP seem like the most natural partners.
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:40 am
Belmaria wrote:ALDE and EPF are Social Democratic parties and are very similar to Labour. Do you object to Labour forming a coalition with our parties?
by The Licentian Isles » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:41 am
Belmaria wrote:You've already been invited to a coalition with the NWP and two other parties, which would have more electoral strength. This is unnecessary.
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:41 am
Nariterrr wrote:What about a coalition merger?
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:43 am
Britanno 2 wrote:Belmaria wrote:ALDE and EPF are Social Democratic parties and are very similar to Labour. Do you object to Labour forming a coalition with our parties?
Personally, yes. But only for the moment. I'm sure we can be strong partners in the future, but I would rather focus on an agreement with the NWP first. If other Labour members or some NWP members suggest negotiating an agreement with both the EPF and ALDE at the same time, then we will of course invite you to talks. This is, however, the current position of the Labour leadership.
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:48 am
Belmaria wrote:It sounds like you're telling us to shove off in an incredibly formal, British fashion. If that's the case, ALDE is prepared to take a hardline stance against any Labour Party policies, considering its unwillingness to work with us at present.
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:51 am
Britanno 2 wrote:Belmaria wrote:It sounds like you're telling us to shove off in an incredibly formal, British fashion. If that's the case, ALDE is prepared to take a hardline stance against any Labour Party policies, considering its unwillingness to work with us at present.
If I wanted to tell you to fuck off, you'd know about it
I hope you reconsider your stance against us, because I think it would be in both of our interests if we are allied, and then we can talk about a coalition as soon as the Labour-NWP agreement is formalised. We're not saying we don't want to work with you, just that we want to sort out a coalition with the NWP first seen as that has been practically in the works since the election.
by The Licentian Isles » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:00 pm
Belmaria wrote:Britanno 2 wrote:If I wanted to tell you to fuck off, you'd know about it
I hope you reconsider your stance against us, because I think it would be in both of our interests if we are allied, and then we can talk about a coalition as soon as the Labour-NWP agreement is formalised. We're not saying we don't want to work with you, just that we want to sort out a coalition with the NWP first seen as that has been practically in the works since the election.
If the Labour party doesn't prioritize working with social democrats before working with communist nationalists, that's a bad omen of things to come. I believe it's quite obvious that the Labour party cares more about far-leftists than it does about being in a strong electoral coalition, considering the fact that our proposed coalition has nearly 25% more members.
by Maklohi Vai » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:03 pm
The Licentian Isles wrote:Belmaria wrote:If the Labour party doesn't prioritize working with social democrats before working with communist nationalists, that's a bad omen of things to come. I believe it's quite obvious that the Labour party cares more about far-leftists than it does about being in a strong electoral coalition, considering the fact that our proposed coalition has nearly 25% more members.
Considering that this is your rhetoric when my colleague tells you that we want to finalise an essentially already existing coalition and then discuss a possible partnership with you in the future, I think that, personally, I would rather have slightly less members in the coalition so that it can work together harmoniously.
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:04 pm
The Licentian Isles wrote:Belmaria wrote:If the Labour party doesn't prioritize working with social democrats before working with communist nationalists, that's a bad omen of things to come. I believe it's quite obvious that the Labour party cares more about far-leftists than it does about being in a strong electoral coalition, considering the fact that our proposed coalition has nearly 25% more members.
Considering that this is your rhetoric when my colleague tells you that we want to finalise an essentially already existing coalition and then discuss a possible partnership with you in the future, I think that, personally, I would rather have slightly less members in the coalition so that it can work together harmoniously.
by The Licentian Isles » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:06 pm
Belmaria wrote:The Licentian Isles wrote:
Considering that this is your rhetoric when my colleague tells you that we want to finalise an essentially already existing coalition and then discuss a possible partnership with you in the future, I think that, personally, I would rather have slightly less members in the coalition so that it can work together harmoniously.
I don't understand why you couldn't simultaneously finalize the pre-existing alliance you have with the NWP and talk about allying with our parties. This seems like an excuse to brush us off, which doesn't bode well with me.
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:11 pm
The Licentian Isles wrote:Belmaria wrote:I don't understand why you couldn't simultaneously finalize the pre-existing alliance you have with the NWP and talk about allying with our parties. This seems like an excuse to brush us off, which doesn't bode well with me.
You clearly aren't going to be convinced whatever I say, so I'm not going to bother. I suggest that you consider your words towards others before you alienate potential political partners.
by The Licentian Isles » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:14 pm
Belmaria wrote:The Licentian Isles wrote:
You clearly aren't going to be convinced whatever I say, so I'm not going to bother. I suggest that you consider your words towards others before you alienate potential political partners.
OOC: Alan is depending on the politics of necessity.
IC: Regardless of your personal feelings towards me, I think you'll find that with close elections such as the most recent one, you'll need all the support you can get. Considering our political similarities, working together should be a no-brainer.
by Collatis » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:15 pm
PRO: social democracy, internationalism, progressivism, democracy,
republicanism, human rights, democratic socialism, Keynesianism,
EU, NATO, two-state solution, Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders
CON: conservatism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, neoliberalism,
death penalty, Marxism-Leninism, laissez faire, reaction, fascism,
antisemitism, isolationism, Republican Party, Donald Trump
Voting Through The Ages | Voter Guide | The Presidents | Voting Without Borders
by Nariterrr » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:15 pm
by Belmaria » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:23 pm
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:25 pm
Belmaria wrote:OOC: Alan is depending on the politics of necessity.
IC: Regardless of your personal feelings towards me, I think you'll find that with close elections such as the most recent one, you'll need all the support you can get. Considering our political similarities, working together should be a no-brainer.
by Nariterrr » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:27 pm
Britanno 2 wrote:Belmaria wrote:OOC: Alan is depending on the politics of necessity.
IC: Regardless of your personal feelings towards me, I think you'll find that with close elections such as the most recent one, you'll need all the support you can get. Considering our political similarities, working together should be a no-brainer.
A coalition isn't required for cooperation. Any policy overlaps we have can be pushed through the senate by legislative cooperation. Anyway, nobody is ruling out a coalition in the future. But you don't seem like you'll ever be satisfied, so if you could leave us to sort out the coalition we have decided we want at the moment it would be appreciated.
by Oneracon » Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:29 pm
Compass
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72
Pro: | LGBTQ+ rights, basic income, secularism, gun control, internet freedom, civic nationalism, non-military national service, independent Scotland, antifa |
Anti: | Social conservatism, laissez-faire capitalism, NuAtheism, PETA, capital punishment, Putin, SWERF, TERF, GamerGate, "Alt-right" & neo-Nazism, Drumpf, ethnic nationalism, "anti-PC", pineapple on pizza |
by Malgrave » Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:36 pm
Frenequesta wrote:Well-dressed mad scientists with an edge.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement