True, I'm all for the whole term limits but I'd would like to keep those two from getting into power, maybe do it as a vote once Rykov either dies or chooses to retire due to the stress from being the General Secretary then bring the concept into effect.
Our Soviet Union (USSR)
- Thread starter CountofDooku
- Start date
Election and term limit vote
That is a very good idea, so let's vote upon it, term limits for the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:
A) 1 Year.
B) 2 Years.
C) 3 Years.
D) 4 Years.
E) 5 Years.
F) 6 Years.
G) 7 Years.
H) 8 Years.
I) 9 Years.
J) 10 years.
Should said years be per term or in total?
A) In total. Meaning someone can be reelected a couple of times, but only serve a said amount of years completely. A given potential couple of terms in general split between the given years
B) Per term. Meaning someone can serve these years in one term, wich would open the option of being B1) reelected later, or B2) never reelected again afterwards.
C) Terms are to be combined with one another.
D) Terms should never be ongoing and especialy between the longer ones there should be a couple of interim candidates in between one another to prevent one person gaining to much influence, connections and power.
Last edited:
E - 5 years
We have 5 year plans, so why not 5 year terms?
B1 - no limit on the number of times one can be elected. If the General Secretary has the confidence of the Soviet People, then they should be allowed to continue for as long as they are willing and able.
E) 5 Years
B) Per term. Meaning someone can serve these years in one term, wich would open the option of being B1) reelected later,
Term Limits for the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:
E) Five years is a fine amount of time for a term. Six years is too long while four years would make us feel to similar to the United States.
Should said years be per term or in total?:
B1) If it is the will of the people, and they see someone as a strong candidate, then they can be allowed to be re-elected as many times as they wish.
I feel like the next vote or one in the future should outline the line of succession in the event that the General Secretary should die in office, be removed from office, resign from office, etc.
E) Five years is a fine amount of time for a term. Six years is too long while four years would make us feel to similar to the United States.
Should said years be per term or in total?:
B1) If it is the will of the people, and they see someone as a strong candidate, then they can be allowed to be re-elected as many times as they wish.
I feel like the next vote or one in the future should outline the line of succession in the event that the General Secretary should die in office, be removed from office, resign from office, etc.
i second this
with the exeption of war time the years where the union is at war the elections are suspended and the years do not count ageinst the incombent
Term limit timeline - E: 5 years, let's each chairman carry out the next 5 year plan as they see fit.
Per term or in total - B1: Let the people decide, not the grim reaper or red tape constraints decide if the man for the job is right or not.
Age bracket between 45 and 70, max 2 terms. Whether they are consecutive or not doesn't matter. You want variation, living experience but also in touch with real life being lived by the mom's and dad's. Not the grandparents, not the kids.
E) Five years is a good balance for the Union.
B1) As the others said, if their very popular among the population then they're allowed to re-elect.
But in case someone like Stalin or Trotsky attempts to ratify the term limits then we should form the Supreme Soviet (if it doesn't exist yet) that could make sure they doesn't attempt it.
B1) As the others said, if their very popular among the population then they're allowed to re-elect.
But in case someone like Stalin or Trotsky attempts to ratify the term limits then we should form the Supreme Soviet (if it doesn't exist yet) that could make sure they doesn't attempt it.
turm limits are not really comrade purge and comrade shitstarters motifs to be fair
True but there's always gonna be someone who'll want to keep their power though.
ironicly i see turm limits being pushed as a political kamakazi to spite a canidit they do not like as a way of "making things fair" and spite shortening someones power but all in all i agree with the establisment of the supream soviet
E) 5 years
B1) People should be able to re-elect their leader if he is popular.
B1) People should be able to re-elect their leader if he is popular.
Thank you very much, well welcome aboard now ;D
What exactly would be on your mind reguarding such a organisation? Should it set up the next leader and a government by him, even before they truely come into power?
I meant like an organization that preserves historical buildings, abandoned villages/towns and the like, sorry about that...
Of course we must preserve our national heritage, comrade, for the sake of posterity.
And to remind the next generation of the failure of the empires of the pasts.