Stage 9  »  La Vila Joiosa/Villajoyosa  ›  Alto de Aitana. Costa Blanca
It was a weird day as the race to win the vuelta basically started anew, after Pogacar abandoned and Mas took over the red jersey. Instantly we went from one possible winner to at least six. And we immediately got a mountain stage with an uphill finish to test out the new contenders.

There was more bad news along the way as Groves (PTM) abandoned the race after his crash yesterday and Torres (MMM) also abandoned for reasons I don't know. Terrible news for the Menceis as Torres was basically the only rider they had left with any sort of standing in GC. After a very similar strategy got them the win last edition, the Menceis may well end up last this time.

Before we got to the final we started with a breakaway, which included Zana (CFA), Sivakov (MMM), Vermaerke (MMM), Camprubi (CHX), Paret-Peintre (CHX), Armirail (REX/CJO) and Calzoni (BDC). For a while it look like some of them might have a chance at a stagewin, but they were all caught on the final climb and from then it was up to the GC contenders.

New red jersey wearer Mas (REX/VFL/BDC/MAN) proved why he now gets to wear the red jersey with Pogacar gone by winning the stage, followed immediately by Onley (CHX/BDC/PTM/DED). Roglic (VFL/CJO/PTM) followed not far behind. Gall (CJO) came in fourth, followed by Christian Rodriguez (REX/VFL/DED), Skjelmose (GHS/CFA) and Widar (GHS/BDC). Carapaz (GHS/REX) disappointed again by coming 9th, but the biggest disappointment was Kuss (REX/CJO/PTM), who finished 11th, 1 minute 44 seconds behind Mas and dropped 3 places in GC. Also in the top 20: Omrzel (BDC/PTM) 15th, Zana 17th and Sivakov 20th.

The win by Mas and strong performances by Onley, Widar and Omrzel meant that BdC win the stage and further extend their lead. After the Pogacar dropout, there was a good chance today Naziun Cjovani would emerge as the favourites heading into week 2, with a full team including 3 of the new GC top 4, but that didn't happen yet. Instead the Kuss loss in GC meant they lost ground to BdC in both the stage and potential end-of-tour points. Els Talossaes Rexhital did manage to leave last place behind, handing over the red lantern to Dirnalaiset Mortescu, appropriately enough.

Standings after stage 9:

Pos	±		Team	Pts Ove	Pts Today
1st	(=)		Cézembre Caçeirs dals Mailintzarăs (BDC)	4233	+655
2nd	(=)		Gordon Hiatus Support Team (GHS)	3527	+335
3rd	(+2)		Velociposse Florencia (VFL)	3249	+595
4th	(-1)		The Manilows (MAN)	3248	+291
5th	(+1)		Port Maxhestic AC (PTM)	3141	+506
6th	(-2)		Cyclohexane (CHX)	3077	+282
7th	(=)		Naziun Cjovani (CJO)	2995	+482
8th	(=)		Maritiimi-Maxhestic Mençeis (MMM)	2538	+66
9th	(+2)		Els Talossaes Rexhital (REX)	2417	+581
10th	(-1)		Cézembre Fieschā (CFA)	2292	+174
11th	(-1)		Dirnalaiset Mortescu (DED)	2265	+342

New General Classification top 15:
1. Mas (REX/VFL/BDC/MAN)
2. Roglic (VFL/CJO/PTM) +1'18"
3. Gall (CJO) +1'39"
4. Onley (CHX/BDC/PTM/DED) +2'20"
5. Carapaz (GHS/REX) +3'26"
6. Skjelmose (GHS/CFA) +3'55"
7. Kuss (REX/CJO/PTM) + 4'09"

10. Omrzel (BDC/PTM) +8'05"

12. Widar (GHS/BDC) + 9'34"
13. Christian Rodriguez (REX/VFL/DED) + 9'42"
14. Martin (CFA) +12'58"

Tomorrow: the first rest day. After a tumultuous week (and stage 8 in particular) the remaining riders may well need it.

(For those who haven't done so yet, a good opportunity to vote on the General Election and the Talossan Music Top 20.)

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on August 30, 2026, 09:24:06 AMOur party is overwhelmingly focused on building things and offering new programs, and the URL is focused on changing laws.

And that would be why you headlined your last mailer with a constitutional scare story?* No doubt because "building things and offering new programs" doesn't excite your core vote (whom I think Glüc characterized accurately).

Honestly, I'm disappointed that the tone got dragged down so close to the finish line.

Quote from: Tierçéu Rôibeardescù on August 30, 2026, 11:52:43 AMAs no back up has come forward at this time, I will reluctantly take on the responsibility of taking up stewardship of this application, but due to breath of the piece and the relatively shallow knolage of international politics outside of talossa itself, i requests a extended period to review it. I appreciate your patience as I work through it. International political theory demands a meticulous, highly focused evaluation, and I prefer not to rush the process when my attention is divided. I will begin marking your paper just as soon as I can dedicate the proper time and analytical depth to it.

I appreciate your taking on this responsibility and the seriousness you are applying to it, Madam President. I'll check back in a month just to see how things are going (not to rush or as a deadline but to see what your initial thoughts are.)

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on August 30, 2026, 10:35:52 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on August 30, 2026, 09:24:06 AMI think you might be conflating two things. There's a difference between criticizing policies or ideas, and attacking people personally. We see some of that in this election, too, because the main criticism that I've seen of the Progs is noting how dominant I am when it comes to government activity.

It may be difficult to tell the difference between valid criticism of your government's record and personal attack when the line between individual and Government has been allowed to blur so much, but I can assure you, this is the former.

I was saying was that I didn't think that you guys had been engaging in a lot of nasty personal attacks this time around, for which I was grateful.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on August 30, 2026, 10:35:52 AMthe contrary, we've said very explicitly that the few and modest objectives your party is offering are generally acceptable, but that if one wants something a bit more forward-thinking, the URL is the correct choice. If we're offering any big criticism of these objectives, what we're noting is that the shift in tone between your previous platform of promising the world and this platform is the implicit recognition that last time, you bit off more than you could chew, and failed to deliver.

We've accomplished some pretty huge things this term, and I'm glad we have even more to go, plus some new ideas to keep moving things forward. I think we have just a different approach to governance (and campaigning), though.

As no back up has come forward at this time, I will reluctantly take on the responsibility of taking up stewardship of this application, but due to breath of the piece and the relatively shallow knolage of international politics outside of talossa itself, i requests a extended period to review it. I appreciate your patience as I work through it. International political theory demands a meticulous, highly focused evaluation, and I prefer not to rush the process when my attention is divided. I will begin marking your paper just as soon as I can dedicate the proper time and analytical depth to it.

Sent out: Aug 15, 2026, 11:15 AM TDT / 4:15 PM UTC
Submitted by: Alexandreu Davinescu on behalf of the Progressive Alliance
Count: 2 of 2 allowed

---

<PROG logo>

As the election winds to a close, we want to ask you one more time to help us keep things moving and to help us save the Senäts. This storied institution is in danger, since our main opposition has vowed to destroy it and turn it into a powerless advisory committee.

Vote Progressive & Save the Senäts!

Yes, we plan to have real physical embassies, beautiful paper maps, and a new approach to our national website. But we also want to fight to preserve what's already been built. We don't subscribe to the philosophy that you cannot move forward unless you burn the past down -- we want to hold on the achievements of the past.

Click here to vote on the database:
https://database.talossa.com/elections/august-2026-elections

or click here to vote on Wittenberg:
https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=5436.msg44709#msg44709

For more about our platform:
https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=5411.0

Final reminders going out by email right now, as well as the second PROG mailer. Two days and six hours left to vote.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on August 30, 2026, 09:24:06 AMI think you might be conflating two things. There's a difference between criticizing policies or ideas, and attacking people personally. We see some of that in this election, too, because the main criticism that I've seen of the Progs is noting how dominant I am when it comes to government activity.

It may be difficult to tell the difference between valid criticism of your government's record and personal attack when the line between individual and Government has been allowed to blur so much, but I can assure you, this is the former.

When you are in government and are running for re-election, one thing you must address, in addition to things like ideology and future plans, is past performance. Some governments likely find this quite easy; this government will have a harder time of it:

- Formation reliant on a politically extreme party, producing a narrow and often-unstable majority;
- Intentional exclusion of skilled and cooperative administrators on the basis of personal spite;
- Employment of individuals rightly condemned for sexual harrassment;
- Failure to deliver on multiple self-imposed goals related to immigration, culture, etc. (see point #2 for a major cause);
- Abuse and improper politicization of non-partisan institutions, including the CRL process and claiming Government credit for work of the Royal Civil Service;
- We can now add to the list "overzealous attempts to prosecute someone who does not actually exist".

I do not envy the Sisyphean task before you.

QuoteBut that's different than saying that it would be a bad idea to establish physical embassies, or that it's unrealistic, or that people would hate it. That would be focusing on our policies and challenging them.

On the contrary, we've said very explicitly that the few and modest objectives your party is offering are generally acceptable, but that if one wants something a bit more forward-thinking, the URL is the correct choice. If we're offering any big criticism of these objectives, what we're noting is that the shift in tone between your previous platform of promising the world and this platform is the implicit recognition that last time, you bit off more than you could chew, and failed to deliver.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 29, 2026, 04:25:38 PM

Quote from: Glüc on August 29, 2026, 04:30:39 AMThere hasn't been much election debate going on so far. Although admittedly I probably missed some of it due to not paying attention. I've read the mailers, but I think party leaders questioning each other about what and how they intend to do things (or for example how they would approach the next government formation) might be more informative.

This is one of those "can't win for losing" situations. In previous elections people have complained that Talossans are too mean and personal and combative. We were told explicitly that in the last election, the URL's sharp critiques of Progressive politics lost us the election. So this election we've made a special effort to pivot to constructive "this is what WE'LL do" stuff rather than bashing the Progs. And that's the wrong rock too, apparently :D

I think you might be conflating two things. There's a difference between criticizing policies or ideas, and attacking people personally. We see some of that in this election, too, because the main criticism that I've seen of the Progs is noting how dominant I am when it comes to government activity. And that's a completely fair critique, and it's usually true whenever I'm in government because I have a hyperabundance of energy and like to do a lot of stuff. It's certainly not coming off as nasty, when compared with the last election, when a lot of this kind of criticism was focused on my character personally. I'm grateful for that!

But that's different than saying that it would be a bad idea to establish physical embassies, or that it's unrealistic, or that people would hate it. That would be focusing on our policies and challenging them.

For myself, I think that comes from what seems to be a very fundamental difference in the approach of the two parties. Our party is overwhelmingly focused on building things and offering new programs, and the URL is focused on changing laws. That was true in the last election, as well. I don't think either of those approaches are wrong, but they are so different that they are different visions of government, more than different programs.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 29, 2026, 04:25:38 PMCan I also notice that there is a real problem implicit in Glüc's comment about "Miestră and AD" cooperating. The leader and Seneschal candidate of the URL is Mic'haglh Autófil. The extent to which Mic'haglh is not seen as a separate entity to myself is regrettable, and something we've been trying to counteract, but it seems that that can't happen until I leave Talossa altogether :D

I think the perception is that you provide a lot of the main energy for your party. You're on Witt easily twice as much as he is, so people just see a lot more of you.

5 votes in with 2 days to go.

These are the standings so far (with some hints):

1. - 31 points - Only 1 top-3 vote
2. - 26 points - Got points from all 5 voters so far
3. - 24 points - Not in the top 20 last year
4. - 22 points - Highest standard deviation
5. - 21 points - Eliminated in Round 2 last year
6. - 21 points - Artist has a song in the hall of fame
7. - 20 points - Second highest standard deviation
8. - 19 points - Two 1 point votes
9. - 19 points - Highest to get no top-3 votes
10. - 18 points - Has been in top 20 more than 3 times before
11 - 18 points - Nominated before 2020
12 - 17 points - First place in the semifinal
13. - 15 points - 5th place in the semifinal
14. - 13 points - Lowest to get 12 points
14. - 6 points - Top 5 last year!