Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Your VP for the Reform Party

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2010 5:33:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
OreEle
 
Thank you Volkov for taking the time to sit down for an interview. You are currently running as the VP for Lex. While you two do have a lot in common on your stances, there are points where you disagree, such as Late Term Abortion, NAFTA, National Sales Tax, and Term Limits. How do you reconcile you different views in order to work together to provide a united front for your party?

Volkov
 
It's my pleasure OreEle. I'm an aspiring journalist myself, so I'm more than happy to see what its like to be in the opposite chair, so to speak.

While we do indeed diverge on, maybe not a lot, but quite a few issues, I think its important to realize that both myself and Lex are open to new ideas, to collaboration, and to compromise. I believe in my convictions just as much as the next guy, but I know that not everyone thinks the same, or comes from the same situation that I do. I hold the ability to be pragmatic and open close to my heart, as does Lex, which is why we can work so well together.

OreEle
 
Are there any issues in which you and Lexicaholic hold so strong that you will not waiver on them?

Volkov
 
Well, I don't know what issues Lex exactly holds that closely to his heart, though I'm learning pretty quickly there is quite a lot of things he does care about, and as we work together more, I'm sure eventually we'll come to something. When it does, we'll have to figure something out. But until then, I think we're good.

But for me, there is one issue that I will never waver on - democracy. No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me to ever be against governance by the people, for the people, and including the people. I am steadfast in my belief that democracy, whether participatory (my preference), representative, or any form therein, is not only the best way to secure rights for every individual, but the ONLY way.

And that is an issue I will NEVER waiver on. Not even on my deathbed.

OreEle
 
As such a strong voice for democracy, would you support a policy that you personally felt was in the best interest of the people, nation, and site even if it wasn't favored by a majority of the people?

Volkov
 
That's a good question. It is one that needs to be wrestled with in any democracy.

I believe that, yes, it is well within the democratic process to institute a policy that may not enjoy majority support, so long as it does nothing to harm the democratic process as a whole. I say this because I am not a populist. I don't agree with letting everyone have votes on every idea, policy, and legislation that passes through the government. That is what elections are for. Voters send representatives to the capital to be their voice, to fight for their interests, and to do their job, which is to vote for the measures that they see as best for the country.

Does this mean you ignore those that are against it? No. You listen to them. You address their concerns, and see where you can work out a compromise. You see where you can maybe help them understand the idea, make it work for them, and how they can have a say in how its created/implemented. You make them feel included in the process, so even though they may not support it, even all the way through to the end, they cannot turn around and say they had no voice. Everyone has a voice. Everyone deserves one.

And come election time, if they still hold it against you, then it is well within their right to vote you out. They can vote someone in that will change it back, or maybe go farther. Whatever the reason, they can all have a say, one way or another. And any democratic politician would accept that.

OreEle
 
It is starting to seem that some of the ads and claims being thrown around are getting more and more negative, with claims of libel already being made. What is your opinion of the current political ad atmosphere?

Volkov
 
Well, I personally don't believe in personal attack ads. Attacking policy, and attacking record? Absolutely. But, attacking someone's character is a no-no. Mind you, I do often jest with wjm over such things - though I hope he realizes that its all in good fun, and that I'd stop if he asked.

Now, at the beginning of this campaign, I said that we should all try to avoid negative attack ads. The Liberty Party didn't hold to this. They attacked us, and they showed they were willing to go with outright lies and mistruths. We never said anything about taxation. We certainly said we did not support European voting. These are all lies that they choose to go with - and we have no choice but to address.

Because if we don't, then they're the ones creating the story. We can't let that happen. We need to address them head on, even if it means maybe going negative. Politics is a messy game, but sometimes you need to do what must be done, in order to ensure the truth is told.

OreEle
 
"We certainly said we did not support European voting." I assume that you mean that you "did not say," correct?

OreEle
 
What do you feel about the Individuals that are making ads, that are not representative of the Liberty Party?

Volkov
 
Haha, yes. >.> Good catch. I had an issue with IE so I rushed that. Anyways, give me a second, and all answer the other question.

Volkov
 
Anyways, individuals that make ads for the Liberty Party, but are not specifically involved - I suppose you could call them "third parties" if you really wanted to - are allowed to say what they will. However, the onus is upon the Liberty Party and their officials to make sure they see these ads, review them, and see which ones thdo support their views, and which ones do not.

I have no issue with third party advertising, but the Liberty Part, just like the Reform Party, should be careful as to who is making what.

OreEle
 
Have you (meaning the Reform Party) received any feedback about the ideas for DDO? Especially in regards to the pay for features?

Volkov
 
Well, our attempt at feedback is rather limited to those that participate in the threads, and actually care about thats going on. And unfortunately, most of those are partisans for either side, which presents a problem.

But, I can tell you that within the organization itself, the leadership and main actors are receiving good feedback on our proposed policies from our footsoldiers. Lex himself was elected as our candidate on those policies. The pay features, as they should be, are a source of controversy, and because I'd hate to rely only on internal party chatter for opinion, I can't really give you an answer on that.

However, it brings me to a point that you maybe didn't intend to bring up; the lack of general interest among I'd say a good portion of the site's members in this election. Its hard to receive true feedback when there isn't anyone there to give feedback. I hope that maybe with time - we still have a few weeks to go yet - this will change, so maybe then you can come back and I can give you a better answer.

OreEle
 
How many members are currently member of the Reform Party? Either as cabinet members or "registered" party members?

Volkov
 
Well, as far as I'm aware, including myself, we have around 20. Might not seem like a lot, but considering that the last election was held with about that many votes if I recall correctly, its pretty damn good. It at least shows we have more participation this time around.

Now, those are mostly cabinet members, but as a rule, we try to get all our "members," or at the very least supporters, in as apart of the administration. It helps getting them involved in the process, which I think is the ultimate goal. But we don't just stop there. Right now we're working out building outreach to progressive members, asking them to consider us for their support, and seeing what ideas we can get from them. Its a process of participation and grassroots ideology, which is good, bec
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2010 5:33:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
continued...

OreEle
 
In much the same way the Bush was a handicap to everyone running as a republican in 2008 (for president and all senate races), do you feel that the dropping approval rating for Obama do to his inability to follow through on campaign promises makes potential voters shy away because you guys are the party on the "left"?

Volkov
 
I'm not worried about such an affect, to be honest. Obama and the Democrats are a completely different set of people than we are, and while we may have some ideological similarities, I don't see how anything would transfer over. We have a lot of different plans, we obviously have a different team, and I think maybe we could learn from the mistakes of his administration, as well as some of his successes.

Plus its important to note that we have quite a few different idealogues on our team. We have conservatives, libertarians, liberals, and social democrats. We're a veritable rainbow of ideologies, and while we may all have a common theme of "leftism," we shouldn't necessarily be nailed down as such.

Volkov
 
effect*, by the way.

OreEle
 
Well, I would like to thank you for sitting through this interview and wish you the best of luck in upcoming election.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2010 9:05:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
"But for me, there is one issue that I will never waver on - democracy. No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me to ever be against governance by the people, for the people, and including the people. I am steadfast in my belief that democracy, whether participatory (my preference), representative, or any form therein, is not only the best way to secure rights for every individual, but the ONLY way.

And that is an issue I will NEVER waiver on. Not even on my deathbed."

I wish we could be reasonable on this issue. According to this quote even if someone convinced you through the use of logic that democracy was a catastrophe you would still support the system. That makes it more of a religious belief than anything else. Just replace democracy with God. :/
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2010 12:40:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think it would be better to mount said argument as see if there really is a logical proof. Just saying that he believes steadfastly in something is not necessarily grounds for rejection of his claims. I would read that simply as he does not believe that any such logical arguments exist.

Furthermore, be concerned if he starts ranting about dictatorships and how steadfastly he supports an abusive regime. Allowing oneself to be wholely committed to one's constituency is not exactly a warning bell...
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2010 3:37:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Thank you, alto. That is exactly what I was articulating. You shouldn't have really bothered to answer him, though - he knows full well what I meant. I don't want to encourage his continuance of "acting stupid," when I know full well he isn't.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2010 3:49:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/19/2010 3:42:15 PM, alto2osu wrote:
Certainly, but I also think that allowing ignorance, even if feigned, to go unanswered could sway favor. :)

It's a delicate balance. One must make sure to answer questions, no matter how pointless they may seem, but one must also not dedicate too much time to that to get distracted from the actual race.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2010 3:51:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/19/2010 3:49:49 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 2/19/2010 3:42:15 PM, alto2osu wrote:
Certainly, but I also think that allowing ignorance, even if feigned, to go unanswered could sway favor. :)

It's a delicate balance. One must make sure to answer questions, no matter how pointless they may seem, but one must also not dedicate too much time to that to get distracted from the actual race.

Again, agreed :)
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 2:38:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 2:35:56 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Volkov said:
We have conservatives, libertarians,

I call BS.

I would like you to cite your source of Volkov saying such a thing, good sir.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 2:41:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 2:38:05 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/20/2010 2:35:56 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Volkov said:
We have conservatives, libertarians,

I call BS.

I would like you to cite your source of Volkov saying such a thing, good sir.

There is such a thing as Ctrl+F, you know.

Plus its important to note that we have quite a few different idealogues on our team. We have conservatives, libertarians, liberals, and social democrats.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:05:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 2:35:56 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Volkov said:
We have conservatives, libertarians,

I call BS.

You may call it if you so wish, but it is true. Even comoncents is apart of our team.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:06:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:05:14 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/20/2010 2:35:56 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Volkov said:
We have conservatives, libertarians,

I call BS.

You may call it if you so wish, but it is true. Even comoncents is apart of our team.

In order for the statement to be true, you must have two (2) or more conservatives and two (2) or more libertarians. Otherwise, the statement is fraudulent.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:13:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:06:15 PM, wjmelements wrote:
In order for the statement to be true, you must have two (2) or more conservatives and two (2) or more libertarians. Otherwise, the statement is fraudulent.

Fine, I'll change my statement to, "a conservative, and a couple libertarians," and etc. My apologies for pluralizing when I shouldn't have. I suspect it will be the downfall of my career. Oh noes.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:17:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Is that the thing you disagree with most in that? The plural use of a word?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:21:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:17:54 PM, OreEle wrote:
Is that the thing you disagree with most in that? The plural use of a word?

Straw-man. I just called BS on a statement that he made. The cards turned over and he was lying.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:24:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:21:13 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Straw-man. I just called BS on a statement that he made. The cards turned over and he was lying.

Actually, I was not lying, it was an improper use of syntax. There's a big difference, and I corrected my statement to count as such. If you do not like it, you can register your complaints as the I-don't-give-a-damn Department, located on the second floor of the Irrelevant Talking Points Office.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:26:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:21:13 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 2/20/2010 3:17:54 PM, OreEle wrote:
Is that the thing you disagree with most in that? The plural use of a word?

Straw-man. I just called BS on a statement that he made. The cards turned over and he was lying.

Actually it was a mis-statement, not a lie. As lies are intentionally giving false information to cause a disception.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:45:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
It's a bit more than that. You had one libertarian. Zero conservatives.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:49:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:26:08 PM, OreEle wrote:
Actually it was a mis-statement, not a lie. As lies are intentionally giving false information to cause a disception.

You don't think Volkov intended to give off the impression that he had a large coalition of conservatives and libertarians backing him?
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:52:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:49:26 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 2/20/2010 3:26:08 PM, OreEle wrote:
Actually it was a mis-statement, not a lie. As lies are intentionally giving false information to cause a disception.

You don't think Volkov intended to give off the impression that he had a large coalition of conservatives and libertarians backing him?

I think, or i would have meant it this way, to intend to come off as reaching across the isle and being truly bi- partisan.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:52:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/19/2010 12:40:02 PM, alto2osu wrote:
I think it would be better to mount said argument as see if there really is a logical proof. Just saying that he believes steadfastly in something is not necessarily grounds for rejection of his claims. I would read that simply as he does not believe that any such logical arguments exist.

Furthermore, be concerned if he starts ranting about dictatorships and how steadfastly he supports an abusive regime. Allowing oneself to be wholely committed to one's constituency is not exactly a warning bell...

Let's let Volkov's words speak for themselves.

"No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me to ever be against governance by the people, for the people, and including the people." - Volkov

Now replace the last part with "that God does not exist" and you have:

"No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me that God does not exist."

That certainly doesn't sound like a very reasonable thing to say. It sounds very stubborn and thick-headed to be honest. It is intended to quell debate by simply reciting that he will never change his mind and that is that.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 3:58:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:52:42 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 2/19/2010 12:40:02 PM, alto2osu wrote:
I think it would be better to mount said argument as see if there really is a logical proof. Just saying that he believes steadfastly in something is not necessarily grounds for rejection of his claims. I would read that simply as he does not believe that any such logical arguments exist.

Furthermore, be concerned if he starts ranting about dictatorships and how steadfastly he supports an abusive regime. Allowing oneself to be wholely committed to one's constituency is not exactly a warning bell...

Let's let Volkov's words speak for themselves.

"No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me to ever be against governance by the people, for the people, and including the people." - Volkov

Now replace the last part with "that God does not exist" and you have:

"No matter who you are, whether you're my worst enemy or my mother, you will not convince me that God does not exist."

That certainly doesn't sound like a very reasonable thing to say. It sounds very stubborn and thick-headed to be honest. It is intended to quell debate by simply reciting that he will never change his mind and that is that.

Yeah, but you're changing words to make it sound more stubborn then it is in order to fit it into something you want to say.

Like if Ragnar_Rahl said, "government is really bad" (he did not actually say this, this is only an example). And if someone were to say "he is a hater!!! let's replace "government is" with "blacks are" then it is "blacks are really bad" to try to force a meaning into his statement that wasn't really there.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:07:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 3:52:42 PM, Reasoning wrote:
That certainly doesn't sound like a very reasonable thing to say. It sounds very stubborn and thick-headed to be honest. It is intended to quell debate by simply reciting that he will never change his mind and that is that.

Reasoning, to start off, the next time you start pinning me down in ways you know are intellectually dishonest, I will not be very civil towards you. And I can be a real d*ck.

Secondly, we've already had this argument. I'm very confident in my belief. Just as confident as you are. Is it bad that I express this confidence?

If I find something better to fit my beliefs and what I believe should be done, then of course I'll consider it. I'm not above looking at new ways to help fit my views. Any reasonable person would say the same. But to this day, I haven't found anything that fits my beliefs as much as my commitment to democracy has.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:09:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 4:07:16 PM, Volkov wrote:
If I find something better to fit my beliefs and what I believe should be done, then of course I'll consider it. I'm not above looking at new ways to help fit my views. Any reasonable person would say the same. But to this day, I haven't found anything that fits my beliefs as much as my commitment to democracy has.

But this contradicts your statement. You said that your opinion would not be changed no matter what anyone suggested.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:17:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 4:09:56 PM, wjmelements wrote:
But this contradicts your statement. You said that your opinion would not be changed no matter what anyone suggested.

Oh please, have you never heard of exaggeration? If politics and beliefs were built solely on some cold, pure-logic system of information, then we'd all be boring sacks spouting monotone philosophy. Oh wait, some of you are!

Listen, if you don't like it you can, with all due respect and sincerity, f*ck off. I'm committed to my belief, but anyone who knows me here know that I'm willing to listen to what you have to say, so long as its interesting and makes sense. If you're going to nitpick my statements, then you're not being honest.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:32:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 4:17:25 PM, Volkov wrote:
If you're going to nitpick my statements, then you're not being honest.

That's politics. It's a darn shame for me not to point out your hypocrisy, but I'm going to play the nice candidate at the moment.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:39:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 4:32:12 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That's politics. It's a darn shame for me not to point out your hypocrisy, but I'm going to play the nice candidate at the moment.

What you're doing is grasping for straws. You know you have no platform, you know your own candidate doesn't give two sh*ts, and you know that you have nothing together over there. You're looking for the smallest, most idiotic thing to pick at in hopes that it will translate into some sort of larger issue.

I've seen it happen before. You're the only person out here advocating for your party. Heck, you're probably the only person who's bothered to do anything. Just give it up, wjm. I'll politik with you, but not when you're going to attack me for being confident in my own beliefs.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2010 4:49:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/20/2010 4:39:57 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/20/2010 4:32:12 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That's politics. It's a darn shame for me not to point out your hypocrisy, but I'm going to play the nice candidate at the moment.

What you're doing is grasping for straws. You know you have no platform,

You don't think I have a platform? Your party doesn't have a platform. Mine is right here: http://www.debate.org... Y'all's is still in progress, according to alto2osu. I have stopped campaigning against you until you decide to come out with a platform.

you know that you have nothing together over there.

In the PMs, we've had a caucus and a convention. We're just as organized as yourself, except that we don't have the excessive and unnecessary bureaucracy and cronyism.

You're looking for the smallest, most idiotic thing to pick at in hopes that it will translate into some sort of larger issue.

I'm picking at all I've got to pick at. Yall don't have a platform. I though yall did, but when I attacked it, yall just claimed it wasn't finished.

I've seen it happen before. You're the only person out here advocating for your party.

Liberty Party has 20 members.

I'll politik with you, but not when you're going to attack me for being confident in my own beliefs.

Overconfident, mind you.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light