The Importance of the Upcoming Election (my views)

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Well, ask the same question every other year, and eventually circumstances will change enough that the ~30-40% support that it has mustered will crest to 50%

Really? I'll keep going, then. We're playing the long game.

(Your innuendo that keeping the constitutional issue alive represses turnout is simply unfounded.)

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I wasn't insinuating that.  It wouldn't even make sense.  If someone's whittling a stick of wood so they can fit it in their pocket, I don't think it makes any sense to say that it's the pocket causing the stick to get smaller.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

The point of the metaphor seems to be that I'm deliberately driving Royalists away so I can totally dominate Talossa. What a cruel thing to insinuate.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

If the position of most FreeDems is and will continue to be that Talossa should be a Republic (or that the Monarch should only have ceremonial power), what is the point of the referendum?

To see which (if either) of those options is accepted by the general public, before going to the trouble of writing the appropriate OrgLaw amendment. What exactly are you scared of? If the broad masses like the status quo, then the Free Democrats will not seek to change the status quo.

It's almost like you're afraid there is a majority out there for an end to a powerful Monarchy...

I'm not afraid of that, because in the last referendum a few years ago, in which we gave the exact three options (the referendum included two questions, one asking if the voter wanted a Monarchy and the other asking if the voter wanted a Monarchy with some power), the Monarchists won by a respectable margin on both counts.

You say you don't want to go through the trouble of writing the amendment if there isn't the support for it, but conducting and contesting a referendum is not a trivial task either, especially given we would have to hash out the exact same issues again when the amendment is actually proposed. It just does not seem like a good use of time and energy.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

You say you don't want to go through the trouble of writing the amendment if there isn't the support for it, but conducting and contesting a referendum is not a trivial task either,

As Ian Txáglh says above, Talossa springs into life in election season. In referendum season, too! Some work will need to be done but it will promote activity.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

Well, ask the same question every other year, and eventually circumstances will change enough that the ~30-40% support that it has mustered will crest to 50%

Really? I'll keep going, then. We're playing the long game.

(Your innuendo that keeping the constitutional issue alive represses turnout is simply unfounded.)

If your plan is to keep asking the same question over and over until you get the result you want, why even ask it?

Also, I think there is something to the suggestion of voter fatigue. I can easily see how voters who are just voting to maintain the status quo on a particular issue would not be as motivated to vote in an ongoing series of referendums as those who are actually trying to make the change.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

You say you don't want to go through the trouble of writing the amendment if there isn't the support for it, but conducting and contesting a referendum is not a trivial task either,

As Ian Txáglh says above, Talossa springs into life in election season. In referendum season, too! Some work will need to be done but it will promote activity.

The kind of activity in which people debate the same question repeatedly would get old fast, I bet.

[esbornatfiglheu]

The kind of activity in which people debate the same question repeatedly would get old fast, I bet.

Though it really does seem that Talossa is never more vibrant than when there is a debate as to what it will be.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Sincerely, the point of the referendum is to find out whether either of the major options for constitutional reform has majority support right now. Admittedly this is so we can choose the option which will have the best chance of success. But this stuff about "referendums too often drive people away / are illegitimate" seems to just be trying to tip debate towards the status quo.

Are you suggesting a law which forbids this question to be asked too often? I believe there's one in Northern Ireland, i.e. they can have a referendum on abolishing the jurisdiction but only one every 10/20 years or something. But why is it worse than - for example - if we presented a New Talossan Republic Amendment or a King's Job Is Now Opening Shopping Malls, Nothing Else Amendment every single Cosa?

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

Sincerely, the point of the referendum is to find out whether either of the major options for constitutional reform has majority support right now. Admittedly this is so we can choose the option which will have the best chance of success. But this stuff about "referendums too often drive people away / are illegitimate" seems to just be trying to tip debate towards the status quo.

Are you suggesting a law which forbids this question to be asked too often? I believe there's one in Northern Ireland, i.e. they can have a referendum on abolishing the jurisdiction but only one every 10/20 years or something. But why is it worse than - for example - if we presented a New Talossan Republic Amendment or a King's Job Is Now Opening Shopping Malls, Nothing Else Amendment every single Cosa?

OK, I guess the point of the midterm referendum would be the practical consideration that you could not pass both the no-powers-Monarchy and the no-Monarchy amendments in the same term, because they would contradict each other. But if the goal is to see which of these could pass referendum, the RCV method would actually be unhelpful. The correct method would be to, like we did last time, ask two different questions, a yes/no on a figurehead Monarchy and a yes/no on a Republic.

I didn't say any referendum would be illegitimate or drive people away, only that lack of motivation to vote might strike one group of voters harder than others if the same question kept coming up.

[DNVercaria]

The kind of activity in which people debate the same question repeatedly would get old fast, I bet.

Though it really does seem that Talossa is never more vibrant than when there is a debate as to what it will be.

Isn't democracy a kind of activity in which people are constantly debating the same questions, like "what is the best way of keeping our community afloat? Do we think that our leaders are doing a good job? Do we need any leaders at all" etc etc.?