Founding Fathers Part Two: Electric Booger Shoe

[mlcorcoran 71]

Also if any player has a Card in their hand that influences voting outcomes, this is the last call for doing that on this Issue

[Actinguy 862]

1 minute ago, mlcorcoran said:

Also if any player has a Card in their hand that influences voting outcomes, this is the last call for doing that on this Issue

We've never had a very good system for this in either playthrough, but so far we've been playing that if anyone either spends influence or plays a card to sway a particular issue, we start again and play out the vote in order (as you're supposed to buy influence or play a card at the same time that you vote -- but for expediency, we don't do it in order unless somebody does indicate that they're going to change the vote totals)

[upandaway 1]

Are you all Ohioans? If so, may appreciate this story.

I was at a convention playing the game with three ladies from Ohio. An Issue came up and one of them realized that a certain response had an effect on Michigan.

"Is it true that if we pass this Michigan will never exist?" she asked.

"Yes" I said.

It passed unanimously! Probably the high point of their game!

[Leuser 16]

@upandaway, that is exactly how these things go! We are quite the collective group though. PA to TX I believe. @Actinguy brought us all together. 

[swejie 21]

As a tOSU alum I approve of that story, too funny

[Actinguy 862]

53 minutes ago, upandaway said:

Are you all Ohioans? If so, may appreciate this story.

I was at a convention playing the game with three ladies from Ohio. An Issue came up and one of them realized that a certain response had an effect on Michigan.

"Is it true that if we pass this Michigan will never exist?" she asked.

"Yes" I said.

It passed unanimously! Probably the high point of their game!

Ha!  That's awesome.

Three Ohioans here, including me -- though I actually consider Pittsburgh to be my home, and went to Penn State.

At Penn State, we hate Ohio State (and WVU).  But Ohio State exclusively hates Michigan. ;c)

[mlcorcoran 71]

Action is to @Woot for deciding vote on Michigan statehood. A Nay vote with 4 IP worth of bonus votes will block it (and force a re-vote in player order), otherwise it will pass.

[Woot 0]

Aye

[Actinguy 862]

1 minute ago, Woot said:

Aye

Michigan statehood confirmed.  God save us.

 

[mlcorcoran 71]

Michigan statehood passes. Spreadsheet updated with +1 Popularity to Hamilton and John Jay.

@Agent B what is next on the President's agenda?

[Actinguy 862]

Just now, Actinguy said:

Michigan statehood confirmed.  God save us.

 

This may be the biggest outcome from the assassination of President Winfield Scott (under an Ohio State player) -- Scott may have prevented it.  ;c)

[mlcorcoran 71]

The deciding vote was cast by Ohio native and legal scholar John McLean.

An institution of higher learning is erected in his honor in the lakeside town of Ann Arbor.

THE Michigan University.

 

[Actinguy 862]

@Agent B

ISSUE FOUR

1816

Mr. President -- the election quickly approaches, and this may be the appropriate time to reconsider whether President Washington missed the mark when he decided to deny the existence of political parties as it relates to our Presidential elections.

Elections thus far have been chaotic, and they've already led to one -- possibly two -- Presidents getting assassinated over it.  

Would it be better to make it clear which candidate is the Presidential candidate and which is the VP for each party, and have them win or lose as a team instead of turning them against each other?  

Besides, having a President and VP with wildly different viewpoints is obviously a recipe for...motive, at least, for any would-be assassins.  Sure, you benefited last time from such a shake up...but you'd be in the target next time, should you end up with a Democrat-Republican as VP.

On the other hand...George Washington was like a father to you.  Are you sure you want to attack his legacy, even if he got it wrong?

[Actinguy 862]

See the rules for how this would change things, but in short:  while players would still directly control the actions of their own candidate, the President and VP win or lose as a team -- no more split tickets, or VPs outperforming their Presidents and seizing the election for themselves, if this passes.

[Agent B 0]

14 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

@Agent B

ISSUE FOUR

1816

Mr. President -- the election quickly approaches, and this may be the appropriate time to reconsider whether President Washington missed the mark when he decided to deny the existence of political parties as it relates to our Presidential elections.

Elections thus far have been chaotic, and they've already led to one -- possibly two -- Presidents getting assassinated over it.  

Would it be better to make it clear which candidate is the Presidential candidate and which is the VP for each party, and have them win or lose as a team instead of turning them against each other?  

Besides, having a President and VP with wildly different viewpoints is obviously a recipe for...motive, at least, for any would-be assassins.  Sure, you benefited last time from such a shake up...but you'd be in the target next time, should you end up with a Democrat-Republican as VP.

On the other hand...George Washington was like a father to you.  Are you sure you want to attack his legacy, even if he got it wrong?

Sorry daddy-o George-e-o. I think things need to evolve. Let us bring some stability to our election process.

Congress?

(I'll need/choose to use a personal IP to put forward)

[Woot 0]

Aye

[Leuser 16]

Nay! I like chaos!

[swejie 21]

As much as I like chaos and look down on the current regime, I shall vote Aye as I believe it is better for our country

[Agent B 0]

My faction votes aye! With the hopes that the new system will alleviate possible corruption, voter fraud, and/or foreign interference. 

[mlcorcoran 71]

Aye!

[mlcorcoran 71]

That brings us to 51 in favor, 7 opposed. The 12th Amendment passes.

+1 Popularity to President Alexander Hamilton.

Any tax or tariff legislation @Agent B before we move on to the Treasury Phase and the Election of 1816?

[Actinguy 862]

Aww, I'll miss the chaos.

While we await further instructions from @Agent B, here's how future elections will work:

As before, the most popular candidate from each party will have right of first refusal for their party's nomination.

As before, they will each choose a VP.  

As before, the President and VP candidate of each party will begin on their home states.

But here is what's different:
 

• Every state now has only a single slot for a candidate to take.  (Previously, each had two slots)
• The President & VP's electoral votes are now tallied together into a single result (previously, they were counted separately and it was possible for a Presidential candidate to lose to their own VP)
• Although they are a team and tally their votes together, the President and VP both still move separately.  If a VP takes a chokepoint state, a President can't move through the VP (or vice versa) -- even though they're on the same team, they are not a single unit.
  
  If there's any questions about this new system, please let me know.  Or, you know, read the rules.  ;c) 

[Agent B 0]

I propose that it is time to repeal emergency bond 2. Our nation has had a good run of luck lately and we may need those funds again in the future.

[Actinguy 862]

22 minutes ago, Agent B said:

I propose that it is time to repeal emergency bond 2. Our nation has had a good run of luck lately and we may need those funds again in the future.

Action to @swejie Secretary Adams to agree or refuse.  Note that you’ll need to meet a difficulty of 6.

[Leuser 16]

Aye