Public Evenly Split On Recalling President Calvin Coolidge

HEM

former
Jorts Connoisseur
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
Pronouns
he / him / his
"Public Evenly Split On Recalling President Calvin Coolidge"
HEM Tiberius Frollo
Managing Editor

During the last week Europeia has been consumed by Trinn-ghazi, a scandal that erupted when former President Trinnien revived an old thread were he announced that he had been abruptly dropped from President Calvin Coolidge's Cabinet for allegedly leaking classified information.

The thread, which made waves when initially posted, had quieted down over the past few weeks without clear resolution. A debate has since played out between a plethora of different sides that could not all be adequately described in this post. Some citizens believe that the notion of "intelligence" in Nationstates is silly. Others believe that it should be okay to have state secrets that cannot be revealed, but there should be some oversight for those secrets if they impact citizens of the region. Others still believe that there's no need for such unnecessary oversight, but the situation was mishandled in this particular case. Some people blame EIA Director North East Somerset. Others blame President Calvin Coolidge. Others still blame former President Aexnidaral Seymour.

This poll sought to clear the murky waters on these issues, if only a little, and discover what Europeia actually believes:



By an overwhelming margin, Europeians believe that the situation was not handled appropriately. There was no significant divide between old members and new members in the answers to this question.

For the vast majority who believe it was bungled, we asked a few more follow-up questions:



The respondents almost unanimously blame President Calvin Coolidge for the situation, while only a few less cast blame upon his predecessor as well. Less than a majority blame EIA Director North East Somerset, who is the only government official to make a formal statement on the matter.



When then asked citizens what should happen in response to the Trinnien scandal. A majority replied that there needed to be some sort of investigatory committee assembled to have oversight in similar situations. A proposal for a such a committee has been pushed hard by Assemblyman Comrade Snowball. There seems to be more support for such a thing than may have been anticipated.

Less than 10% felt that the EIA should be totally dissolved, and even less than that (6.3%) felt that all evidence should be made public. About 1/4th of respondents did not relate to any of the policy prescriptions offered.

We then asked all survey respondents to categorize their current confidence levels in EIA Director North East Somerset.



NES is presented with a very mixed picture. A plurality of people say that they are "kinda confident" of the DEIA. However, a strong quarter of respondents claim to be "very confident" while only 16.3% are "Not at all confident."

There appears to be a new/old member divide on NES that becomes clear when we ask respondents how they would vote if they were in the Senate, and they were considering the question of his reconfirmation:


A majority of old members say they would "definitely" vote "Aye" on such a confirmation. Only roughly 15% of old members would "definitely" or "probably" vote Nay. A plurality of 41.7% of new members are undecided, and only 16.7% would "definitely" vote Aye.

In total, just barely over a majority (51.2%) said they would probably, or definitely vote Aye on NES' reconfirmation as DEIA, however the vast majority of the remaining respondents would be undecided.

We then turned out attention to President Calvin Coolidge:



Given the question before, this is perhaps unsurprising. An overwhelming percent of Europeians believe that President Coolidge deserves "a lot" or "some" responsibility in the ensuing scandal.

President Coolidge has been weathering a lot of criticism over the last week. Some voters have been restless, so we effectively asked them, should the President be removed from office?



39.5% of Europeians would either "definitely" or "probably" vote to recall President Calvin Coolidge. This is an almost even split with the 41.9% who would definitely or probably vote to not remove the President. An undecided 18.6% would be the kingmakers for the majority, though the Senate needs 2/3rds vote to remove a President.

Perhaps even more surprising than this result itself, is the gap between old and new members


Typically in these questions we see the younger members giving politicians the benefit of the doubt, while old members approach the situation in a more draconian fashion. Here, however, it's new members who are more ready to force a change.

45.8% of new members would vote to remove the President, while less than 30% of old members said the same. This is a large demographic shift from what we've come to expect in these polls.



A healthy majority of citizens are confident in the Chancellery, which is typically above much scrutiny in politics.



Finally, this question, which attracted some controversy in public spaces. It appears that most Europeia, when push comes to shove, would prefer to maintain the status quo of generally "following the rules of the game." However, there has been quite a bit of discussion for a "middle ground" or slightly modifying the system so there is more protections for citizens being "burned" in game.

And finally, the glorious commentary:

The poll didn't ask, but the majority of the responsibility falls on Aex

I don't like the last question it's too black and white and I am in the middle.
One the last question I think yes we should try and stick to those as best as possible in the Trinn case I think he should have been told. Trinn was someone who no one would doubt loved the region and I struggle to see him deliberately leaking info to harm us. I believe that at this point Trinn should be given a full explanation of why what happened happened, including any classified info. Sometimes I worry people forget that this is a game and not real life.

The last question "Which statement represents your view in Europeia," is something I vehemently disagree with. Its purpose seems to force people to take opposite sides on an issue, and a very polarized one. And making it mandatory to answer...truly disappointing.

My only issue with everything that has taken place is that Calvin shouldn't have told Trin about the leak. It was totally unnecessary, and is what landed us in this mess. I can't fathom what Calvin hoped to achieve by telling him that much. This is what I would have liked to have seen addressed in the DEIA's statement, not the generic drivel that we were all well aware of regardless.

I can tell the author of this poll is a part of the EIA and seems to have an agenda to push. The lack of middle ground on the multiple choice questions is noted.

The last question is confusing. By the possibility of leaving, does it mean something like Palmoniz, or a more serious departure?

Mistakes were made. Simple as that. I wish I could tell whether NES was truly serving his interests or the Region's but I simply have to trust that it's the latter.

While I think Cal screwed up massively here, I don't think recalling him is appropriate over this error.

Also, I don't think an investigatory committee should be looking at *all* EIA evidence, but I do think it should have the authority to look at specific evidence when the public furor goes up in flames, like this one - basically, the investigatory committee could subpoena the relevant evidence, for lack of a better way of putting it.

We need an iinvestigation

Undecided on the NES reconfirmation question because there isn't an "other" option, and if there was my answer would be "I have no choice but to reconfirm, considering the EIA is NES and his contacts. No one else controls the intelligence resources and other directors and agents are in name only"

Also, you didn't ask but I do partially blame Aexnidaral for this too. He should not have approached a Senator with this information for a variety of reasons - breach in protocol, got back to Trinnien which would have made things complicated even if Calvin hadn't mishandled this, and should have kept quiet as a church mouse about EIA things if they are possibly part of an ongoing investigation

Well, I think this situation was badly handled. We lost an eminent citizen. I don't blame a single person but I think some persons are collectively responsible for it. The situation could have been handled better.

I felt several questions the options were written to elicit the answer you want. For example, is just terrible. Who would want to *totally* suspend the rules at the *possibility* of being butthurt.

The last question needs more variability.

No comments

I believe that Aexnidaral and Calvin both deserve a massive share of the responsibility for this situation, in particular I believe that Aex acted in a manner which was inappropriate when he involved Senator Isaris in matters and I believe the legality of that involvement should be investigated.

The last question is excessively limited and doesn't have an option that addresses abusing by our laws but not treating play intelligence like it actually is sensitive or has significant potential to cause harm.

fwiw, yes this poll was apart of an EIA plot to brainwash the region.

##​
 
I did not expect this much support for a recall over this. That is a little disturbing, tbh. Much as i think Cal dropped the ball, hard, its a little much to crucify him over this, no?
 
Cerian Quilor said:
I did not expect this much support for a recall over this. That is a little disturbing, tbh. Much as i think Cal dropped the ball, hard, its a little much to crucify him over this, no?
I did not vote in this poll, but if I had to guess I would say that people probably see this as the only notable thing about Calvin's term, and are quicker to pull the trigger on a recall because they can't really point to any other accomplishments to counteract it. His overall approval ratings were not that great, after all.
 
I think Vert is mostly spot on here. As a matter of fact, I suspect putting the question of recall in the context of the Trinnien scandal may have actually helped his numbers — because I think only a select few would support recall on basis of that single controversy alone.

I think this has just been a really bad term, and I've seen no evidence that our Presidency (1) recognizes that (2) has any intention of righting the ship.
 
Cerian Quilor said:
I did not expect this much support for a recall over this. That is a little disturbing, tbh. Much as i think Cal dropped the ball, hard, its a little much to crucify him over this, no?
I think the tongue in cheek -ghazi suffix to the scandal is accurate for comparison to the impeachment Q for this reason. If you remove what's been happening from the picture re: Trinnghazi you have a term with muddled to weak approval and a lot of underlying angst. (And in fairness to "both sides" there's some section of the electorate that will always vote as if the incumbent is cataclysmic) These factors coupled with a high profile scandal give some voters a "wrong" to latch on to, to justify why they'd remove or impeach.

(To be clear I'm not arguing if this is positive or negative, just stating my opinion on why that number is so high)
 
Very interesting results, and I concur with HEM's statement above. Also lol @ whoever it was that thought HEM being in the EIA (apparently) makes him write biased polls. Speaking of which, that last question sure is catching a lot of flack.
 
I'm not sure if this is because I'm a newcomer, but I doubt how accurate the last question will be at portraying the overall opinion of the region. The second option seems a lot more rational, unlike the first option, which seems uncomfortably extreme. And its result appears to contradict the other feelings portrayed in the previous question results.
 
HEM said:
I think Vert is mostly spot on here. As a matter of fact, I suspect putting the question of recall in the context of the Trinnien scandal may have actually helped his numbers — because I think only a select few would support recall on basis of that single controversy alone.

I think this has just been a really bad term, and I've seen no evidence that our Presidency (1) recognizes that (2) has any intention of righting the ship.
This.

It'd be interesting to see how much impact the Trinnien controversy had on his terrible approval rating over the first half of the term. It was frequently brought up in the comments for that question, after all.
 
Comrade Snowball said:
The big question is whether the Senate calls for a recall.
Doesn't have to be the Senate; citizens can start a referendum as well. I wouldn't be surprised if we see either though, at this point.
 
I'm tempermentally allergic to recalls in most cases. So far, I feel like a Recall might be much - for all that the President is absent, seems like the Cabinet is humming along mostly nicely, IMO, and I almost don't want to risk shaking that up.

Then again... where is the Panda?
 
Kaboom said:
Well, guess no recall is necessary this time.
We can recall other people just for fun :creepy: :creepy:
 
HEM said:
I think Vert is mostly spot on here. As a matter of fact, I suspect putting the question of recall in the context of the Trinnien scandal may have actually helped his numbers — because I think only a select few would support recall on basis of that single controversy alone.

I think this has just been a really bad term, and I've seen no evidence that our Presidency (1) recognizes that (2) has any intention of righting the ship.
I think this seems to be a pattern for Calvin. This is the second term that his presidency has been widely criticized for lack of productivity and his subsequent inablity to recognize/rectify it.

EDIT: Or you know I could start with the goldenblock and then make my way to Lethomonarchy next time :p
 
Back
Top