Jump to content
270soft Forum

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

I think their Nationalrat (national legislature), Landtag (state legislatures), European Parliamentary, and Presidential (useless waste of an election, as I understand) elections are staggered from each other.

Oh Presidents have also a six year term 

6 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

How often are Austrian elections? Every 4 years?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

How often are Austrian elections? Every 4 years?

 

2 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Parliamentary elections every 5 years regularly. Most state parliaments as well 5 years, however, Upper Austria has 6 year terms. 

 

2 minutes ago, wolves said:

We sadly don't have devolution on a large scale in a state like system in the UK (despite Blair's attempts in the early 2000s) so theres not much I comment on like that.

Well, here we've got a Federal election and an Alberta Provincial one, both of which are quite pivotal and important. And you must forgive me that in sheer interesting, engaging, dynamic, intriguing, and captivating quality, American politics and elections ranks among the very lowest in those qualities in the First World from my perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patine said:

 

 

Well, here we've got a Federal election and an Alberta Provincial one, both of which are quite pivotal and important. And you must forgive me that in sheer interesting, engaging, dynamic, intriguing, and captivating quality, American politics and elections ranks among the very lowest in those qualities in the First World from my perspective.

I don't disagree at all. That's why I'm only really tracking two elections this cycle. There's nothing really interesting about a two party system with candidates who aren't really that different from each other when it comes to governing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Patine said:

I think their Nationalrat (national legislature), Landtag (state legislatures), European Parliamentary, and Presidential (useless waste of an election, as I understand) elections are staggered from each other.

Concerning the presidential waste of time. Guess who would see a possibility of gaining more profit, when we still had an emperor as ceremonial head of state? :P Look at GB, the monarchy is awesome the way it is there now. The tourists buy all the souvenirs and you do not waste any money on a more or less ceremonial election.

And I still believe the Nazi Party would have never gained any traction if Germany and Austria had remained monarchies. I consider this as a big mistake and if I were able to change it to the British system, I did so. (The American system would be awesome as well, but the Austrian (and German) are impracticable imho)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Concerning the presidential wast of time. Guess who would see a possibility of gaining more profit, when we still had an emperor as ceremonial head of state? :P Look at GB, the monarchy is awesome the way it is there now. The tourists buy all the souvenirs and you do not waste any money on a more or less ceremonial election.

And I still believe that the Nazi Party would have never gained any traction if Germany and Austria had remained monarchies. I consider this as a big mistake and if I were able to change it to the British system, I did so. (The American system would be awesome as well, but the Austrian (and German) are impracticable imho)

You are right about the Nazis. But it wasn't just the lack of a monarchy that filled the void. In the end, it was Germany and Austria's losses in WWI (which toppled both monarchies right near the end) that gave the Nazis the vast majority of ammunition (and myths therearound) to build their platform on and actually sell it. If the Central Powers had won, or there had ended up being some Korea-style cease-fire without an actual winner, there would have been no Nazis at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

If this is the case, then y'all are in some serious trouble.

Yup. It'd be a shame if Democrats adopted her as their savior, when they could have had Bernie. I'm already hoping Andrew Gillum has the same kind of support come in for him if he wins the Governor's race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

2) Texas Senate race- The idea that an openly liberal man is within the margin of error in the state that gave the nation the Bush family is interesting. I'm curious how relatively Republican leaning counties such as Tarrant will vote in this race.

Unfortunately though, the Bushes are New England boys, and I don't say that proudly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Concerning the presidential waste of time. Guess who would see a possibility of gaining more profit, when we still had an emperor as ceremonial head of state? :P Look at GB, the monarchy is awesome the way it is there now. The tourists buy all the souvenirs and you do not waste any money on a more or less ceremonial election.

And I still believe the Nazi Party would have never gained any traction if Germany and Austria had remained monarchies. I consider this as a big mistake and if I were able to change it to the British system, I did so. (The American system would be awesome as well, but the Austrian (and German) are impracticable imho)

Although, if Karl von Habsburg were made a ceremonial monarch of Austria, but NOT Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Transylvania, and the bit pieces that now belong to Italy, Serbia, Poland, and Ukraine that was the whole Dual-Monarchy of Austria-Hungary, wouldn't he, by feudal tradition and convention, just be the Archduke of Austria and not the full Emperor anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Patine said:

Although, if Karl von Habsburg were made a ceremonial monarch of Austria, but NOT Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Transylvania, and the bit pieces that now belong to Italy, Serbia, Poland, and Ukraine that was the whole Dual-Monarchy of Austria-Hungary, wouldn't he, by feudal tradition and convention, just be the Archduke of Austria and not the full Emperor anymore?

This maight be true, but it should not be a huge problem and we could still change the wording. 

As far as I remember, our last emperor, Karl I. was labelled as Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary and so on. Therefore, perhaps, it would be wrong to call the new emperor that way as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, jnewt said:

Unfortunately though, the Bushes are New England boys, and I don't say that proudly.

Sure, maybe in birth. But they dominated Texas politics, and played a major role in turning the state into a Republican stronghold. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Tennessee Senatorial

2. Florida

3. Georgia

I'm surprise there's not more liberal following for the race in Tennessee. Bredesen has a very real possibility of turning what less than a year ago was considering one of the safer Republican seats into a Democratic gain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

1. Tennessee Senatorial

2. Florida

3. Georgia

I'm surprise there's not more liberal following for the race in Tennessee. Bredesen has a very real possibility of turning what less than a year ago was considering one of the safer Republican seats into a Democratic gain. 

I thought about putting Tennessee, but I see more likely takeovers in Arizona or Nevada. Tennessee is definitely one to watch, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Cheshire West and Chester Local Elections in May 2019 I'm running as a Labour Candidate in one of the wards.

2. US Midterms.

3. Brazillian Presidential Election 2018.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

1. Tennessee Senatorial

2. Florida

3. Georgia

I'm surprise there's not more liberal following for the race in Tennessee. Bredesen has a very real possibility of turning what less than a year ago was considering one of the safer Republican seats into a Democratic gain. 

I like TN because I love Marsha Blackburn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Universal Home Care referendum (leading in the polls despite all 4 gubernatorial candidates opposing it).

2. Maine gubernatorial election (tied 39-39)

3. ME-02 race (seeing if Golden can pull off this close race).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

I like TN because I love Marsha Blackburn

Do you perceive the relatively closeness of the race as an indication of the weakness of Blackburn, or as the appeal of Bredesen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

Do you perceive the relatively closeness of the race as an indication of the weakness of Blackburn, or as the appeal of Bredesen?

The latter majorly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, OH Gov (Home state, and a very close race in a state that increasingly leans right), TX Sen, because no democrat has any business being anywhere near Cruz in polls, but here we are, and the overall house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Harris/Ernst 2020 said:

@NYConservativecurious are you interested in it because it's your state, or because you believe that it is competitive?

Both, The competiton is this is generally a democratic state, but Chele Farley could possibly beat out Gillibrand with some swing counties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Gov / Lt Gov / AG-- I think the potential for Nixon, Williams, and Teachout to win is a lot higher than we're realizing (I also live in NY, so I'm watching the state senate race in my neighborhood too as a former-IDC member is being challenged and Gillibrand endorsed the challenger)

TX senate, albeit not watching super intently

CA-25, mostly because Vice News is doing a multi-part documentary on that race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lizphairphreak said:

NY Gov / Lt Gov / AG-- I think the potential for Nixon, Williams, and Teachout to win is a lot higher than we're realizing (I also live in NY, so I'm watching the state senate race in my neighborhood too as a former-IDC member is being challenged and Gillibrand endorsed the challenger)

TX senate, albeit not watching super intently

CA-25, mostly because Vice News is doing a multi-part documentary on that race

And for NY Gov, What about Marcus Molinaro? He actually stands a chance unlike the last couple of people if Nixon passes Cuomo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×