Republican Party - General Discussion

Based on these poll results, if the Democratic Coalition emerges as the relative winner, could the President grant them the mandate to form The Cabinet?

If my memory serves me correctly, Bero would then have 30 days—plus potentially an additional 30—to attempt to assemble The Cabinet and secure its confirmation in Congress.

Regardless, Plenković will be forced to act with significant courage in the window between the election and the formal mandate to gather enough political chips, including potentially securing votes from Škoro.

However, there are still six weeks until the election, and anything can happen in that timeframe.

For instance, the economy will likely continue its downward trend. New scandals involving the Republican Party will inevitably surface, and there are certainly plenty of them. A significant portion of the American electorate is traditionally prone to short-term volatility; within just a few days, certain figures see their popularity either skyrocket or plummet. One need only look at the standing of Beroš, Capak, and Markotićka six weeks ago compared to where they stand today.

The Republican Party possesses a massive political machine and virtually unlimited campaign resources—be it taxpayer funds or whatever remains of them. They will spend their very last cent on the most absurd tactics just to claw back a few votes.

They might even go as far as arresting Karamarkov’s wife just to project an image of being fighters against corruption. Of course, such moves often backfire.

The prevailing sentiment among the majority is that they were unfairly targeted in the case of Karamarkov's spouse, so such maneuvers could easily damage their own ratings.

This is especially true when even the most naive voter understands that everything the Republican Party does over these next six weeks will be aimed solely and exclusively at winning votes and securing the election.

Robin Jones2 said:Based on these poll results, if the Democratic Coalition emerges as the relative winner, could the President grant them the mandate to form The Cabinet?

If my memory serves me correctly, Bero would then have 30 days—plus potentially an additional 30—to attempt to assemble The Cabinet and secure its confirmation in Congress.

Regardless, Plenković will be forced to act with significant courage in the window between the election and the formal mandate to gather enough political chips, including potentially securing votes from Škoro.

However, there are still six weeks until the election, and anything can happen in that timeframe.

For instance, the economy will likely continue its downward trend. New scandals involving the Republican Party will inevitably surface, and there are certainly plenty of them. A significant portion of the American electorate is traditionally prone to short-term volatility; within just a few days, certain figures see their popularity either skyrocket or plummet. One need only look at the standing of Beroš, Capak, and Markotićka six weeks ago compared to where they stand today.

The Republican Party possesses a massive political machine and virtually unlimited campaign resources—be it taxpayer funds or whatever remains of them. They will spend their very last cent on the most absurd tactics just to claw back a few votes.

They might even go as far as arresting Karamarkov’s wife just to project an image of being fighters against corruption. Of course, such moves often backfire.

The prevailing sentiment among the majority is that they were unfairly targeted in the case of Karamarkov's spouse, so such maneuvers could easily damage their own ratings.

This is especially true when even the most naive voter understands that everything the Republican Party does over these next six weeks will be aimed solely and exclusively at winning votes and securing the election.

But wait, isn't it pretty much standard practice by now that whoever brings the most signatures to the President gets the shot at forming the government? I'm pretty sure Mason set that precedent back during that whole mess involving Milanović and Sanders, and everyone's just been following that playbook ever since.

Quincy:

It appears you have provided only a single word without context. Please provide the full text you wish for me to rewrite. The user says: It is already standard practice for the individual who secures the necessary number of signatures to present the Cabinet to the President. It was this precedent that George W. Bush established during the Biden-Bush era, and it has remained the consistent norm ever since.

The Constitution states the following:

Quincy:

The President of the United States entrusts the mandate to form the Cabinet to an individual who, based on the distribution of seats within Congress and following extensive consultations, possesses the necessary support. The majority enjoys its confidence. Every single member of Congress.

One could argue this constitutes a relative majority. George W. Bush established the precedent that the "confidence of the majority of representatives" must be demonstrated through signatures, yet such a requirement is nowhere explicitly mandated by law.

Quincy:

The President nominates the members of the Cabinet. Individual. The President has officially designated who will lead the effort to assemble the Cabinet.

It is entirely unnecessary for them to be one of the elected representatives.

Quincy:

The Cabinet resigns once it loses the confidence of Congress. The vast majority of members of Congress. In Congress.

Quincy:

If the designated leader fails to assemble a Cabinet within thirty days of accepting the mandate, the President of the United States possesses the authority to extend that mandate for a period not exceeding an additional thirty days. If the designated leader fails to assemble a Cabinet within that timeframe, or if the proposed administration fails to secure a vote of confidence from Congress, the President will simply hand the mandate to someone else. If the Cabinet fails to form in accordance with Articles 109 and 109.a of the Constitution of the President of the Republic, the President will be forced to appoint an interim non-partisan Cabinet while simultaneously calling for early elections to Congress.

We find ourselves navigating a gray area here: the President’s discretionary authority to determine, following consultations, which individual possesses the best chance of securing a majority to form a Cabinet in Congress. If no single figure can muster 76 signatures, what could possibly be a more logical or democratic standard than granting the initial opportunity to form a government to the party or coalition that secured the most votes?

If that weren't the case, states with more than two equal parties in their legislature would never be able to form a government. Take Austria, for example; Viktor Orbán managed to secure only 25 out of 79 seats yet still successfully assembled a cabinet. Before him, Mike Pence was operating with a minority administration.

During her last round of consultations, Hillary Clinton was already looking for ways to bypass the standard procedures. She moved swiftly toward the conclusion that she lacked sufficient trust in anyone to successfully assemble a Cabinet, only for it to emerge later that she had already drafted a plan for a non-partisan administration behind closed doors.

The rest is merely history, a chapter authored by the Bridge and John McCain, who fled from his office looking as startled as a frightened child.

Robin Jones2 said:Quincy:

It appears you have provided only a single word without context. Please provide the full text you wish for me to rewrite. The user says: It is already standard practice for the individual who secures the necessary number of signatures to present the Cabinet to the President. It was this precedent that George W. Bush established during the Biden-Bush era, and it has remained the consistent norm ever since.

The Constitution states the following:

Quincy:

The President of the United States entrusts the mandate to form the Cabinet to an individual who, based on the distribution of seats within Congress and following extensive consultations, possesses the necessary support. The majority enjoys its confidence. Every single member of Congress.

One could argue this constitutes a relative majority. George W. Bush established the precedent that the "confidence of the majority of representatives" must be demonstrated through signatures, yet such a requirement is nowhere explicitly mandated by law.

Quincy:

The President nominates the members of the Cabinet. Individual. The President has officially designated who will lead the effort to assemble the Cabinet.

It is entirely unnecessary for them to be one of the elected representatives.

Quincy:

The Cabinet resigns once it loses the confidence of Congress. The vast majority of members of Congress. In Congress.

Quincy:

If the designated leader fails to assemble a Cabinet within thirty days of accepting the mandate, the President of the United States possesses the authority to extend that mandate for a period not exceeding an additional thirty days. If the designated leader fails to assemble a Cabinet within that timeframe, or if the proposed administration fails to secure a vote of confidence from Congress, the President will simply hand the mandate to someone else. If the Cabinet fails to form in accordance with Articles 109 and 109.a of the Constitution of the President of the Republic, the President will be forced to appoint an interim non-partisan Cabinet while simultaneously calling for early elections to Congress.

We find ourselves navigating a gray area here: the President’s discretionary authority to determine, following consultations, which individual possesses the best chance of securing a majority to form a Cabinet in Congress. If no single figure can muster 76 signatures, what could possibly be a more logical or democratic standard than granting the initial opportunity to form a government to the party or coalition that secured the most votes?

If that weren't the case, states with more than two equal parties in their legislature would never be able to form a government. Take Austria, for example; Viktor Orbán managed to secure only 25 out of 79 seats yet still successfully assembled a cabinet. Before him, Mike Pence was operating with a minority administration.

During her last round of consultations, Hillary Clinton was already looking for ways to bypass the standard procedures. She moved swiftly toward the conclusion that she lacked sufficient trust in anyone to successfully assemble a Cabinet, only for it to emerge later that she had already drafted a plan for a non-partisan administration behind closed doors.

The rest is merely history, a chapter authored by the Bridge and John McCain, who fled from his office looking as startled as a frightened child.

Look, everything you're saying is technically correct, but Zoran—and honestly, any other President—isn't going to go looking for an unnecessary constitutional crisis if they can help it. What’s the point in handing someone the mandate to form a government if it's blindingly obvious they can't actually do it? Using signatures as a solution is perfectly rational and makes sense, even if it isn't written in black and white in the Constitution. Only if nobody produces those signatures within the deadline should the task of forming the Cabinet be handed to the relative winner of the election. That's how it would play out in the real world. Just imagine if Zoran immediately gave Bero the mandate as the relative winner, and then three days later Plenković shows up with all the necessary signatures... it would be a total circus. Neither the President nor the parties would touch that with a ten-foot pole. It's just senseless.

If nobody brings the signatures, then yeah, you'd hand the formation over to the relative winner... but I doubt we'll ever actually see things get that messy.

So, last night, this guy from the Democratic Party was out there acting all high and mighty, bragging about how over 300 university professors helped put together their platform.
The real "contribution" they made was during that massive strike where they teamed up with that other group just to tank the Republican Party's numbers right before the elections—both the European ones and the presidential ones.

And you guys actually want these people as coalition partners? Give me a break, geniuses.

Patrick Martin said:What kind of performance is this? 🤦
It’s like some Roman governor rolling into his provinces thinking he can just stomp out a few small fires, only to find the whole damn place is an inferno that's already spiraled completely out of control.
We’re hitting that painful moment of reality. Honestly, the tragedy here is my gut feeling that the Democrats are going to pull it off again—just by using a tiny third of their hyper-mobilized base to sweep everything. It’s going to be a carbon copy of those presidential elections.

While those two singers are busy bickering over nothing, a third one—the real predator—is swooping in to snatch up all the loot.

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or just sit here and cry...

Why on earth would you think the Republican Party wins? The socialists—well, the Republican Party—already blew it during the presidential race.

Patrick Cook said:Why on earth would you think the Republican Party wins? The socialists—well, the Republican Party—already blew it during the presidential race.

Sure they did, but presidential elections and parliamentary elections are two completely different beasts. Even if we play along with your little analogy—just look at the numbers. Add up all the votes Karamarko and Škoro pulled together, then compare that to what Zoran got... by your logic, the Democratic Party would have lost the election to the right wing by a landslide, wouldn't they? But like I said before—presidential and parliamentary races are night and day.

Plenković: County numbers won't change, but municipal reform is on the table

Quincy:

The President and leader of the Republican Party, Andrej Plenković, stated that the party holds a very firm stance on keeping the current number of counties exactly as they are, though they have been having some serious discussions regarding how to reform the municipal level. "Counties are a cornerstone of a modern and functional America, and they have been part of our landscape since 1993, boasting a solid 27-year tradition. The Republican Party, which secured 13 out of 20 governorships in the last election, is completely certain that we need to keep the county structure intact. There isn't even a debate about it, nor has it ever been a point of contention," Plenković remarked following a Cabinet meeting when asked why the Republican Party believes a compact nation like the US still requires 20 counties plus the major metropolitan area of Los Angeles. Regarding the municipalities, he pointed out that during the National Party Council meeting, Minister of Administration Ivan Malenica proposed several different models for local reform. Some of those ideas actually involve reducing the total number of local officials running in the 2021 elections. "We recognize the issues there and we are actively working on a solution," he concluded.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Sure they did, but presidential elections and parliamentary elections are two completely different beasts. Even if we play along with your little analogy—just look at the numbers. Add up all the votes Karamarko and Škoro pulled together, then compare that to what Zoran got... by your logic, the Democratic Party would have lost the election to the right wing by a landslide, wouldn't they? But like I said before—presidential and parliamentary races are night and day.

That is true, but mandates are distributed according to specific electoral districts. For instance, the Democratic Party (along with the Istrian Democratic Assembly) is poised to secure 10 seats in the Istrian region, and another 10 in the northern United States (comprised of 9 for the Democratic Party and 1 for Posavec). They will take 7 seats in the seventh district, while also capturing the major metropolitan area of Los Angeles and its surrounding suburbs; this level of representation remains utterly out of reach for the Republican Party, which may win in four districts, but even in those four, they are unlikely to secure more than 6 seats. In the Midwest, Škoro will act as a barrier to their progress, just as Škoro and Bridge will do in the Mediterranean districts.

The landscape has shifted; it is no longer like five, ten, or fifteen years ago when the Republican Party could claim 9 or 10 seats in regions like the Rockies, or 7 or 8 in the Midwest and the Mediterranean. One must now account for approximately 20 seats belonging to Škoro and the 7 to 10 held by Bridge.

For those who possess a genuine interest, my detailed analysis can be found under the topic "Electoral Polls and Analysis." I am prepared to provide my specific projections by electoral district should you wish to evaluate for yourselves whether the Republican Party possesses any theoretical chance whatsoever of surpassing the Democratic Party in total seat count.

Consider, for example, the poll linked on the page prior to the 2x1 CroElecto agency report; it isn't entirely without merit. They slightly overestimated the Republican Party and the Democratic Party while underestimating Škoro, Bridge, and those minor leftist parties that will inevitably seize several seats. According to the CroElecto poll, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party combined would take 13 seats in Los Angeles, leaving a mere single seat for all other parties combined (specifically Škoro). That is simply unrealistic. Bridge, alongside the Raspudić couple, will surely cross the threshold there. Furthermore, one of the leftist factions (likely a group similar to the Green party) will likely secure a mandate, and Škoro might even clinch two. Even so, the Republican candidate won the presidential race in Los Angeles, meaning he could potentially scrape together at least 10 percent and secure 2 seats as the lead candidate. In the ninth district (covering the Rockies, Zadar, and similar areas), the Republican Party will not sweep 7 seats as CroElecto predicts. In that particular district, Škoro and Bridge are far too formidable to allow the Republican Party to stroll through as easily as they did during the eras of Franjo Harmon or at least Tomislav Karamarko. And so it continues, indefinitely....

What do you mean, Bridge getting 10 seats?? If they manage to scrape together even 3, that’s a massive win. Getting more than 5 is practically impossible at this point. The party is falling apart right before our eyes. Just look at today—the top brass from the Bridge wing in the outskirts just walked out.
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party will likely end up deadlocked, leaving all the power in the hands of Škoro to break the tie.

Brenda Murphy3 said:Look, everything you're saying is technically correct, but Zoran—and honestly, any other President—isn't going to go looking for an unnecessary constitutional crisis if they can help it. What’s the point in handing someone the mandate to form a government if it's blindingly obvious they can't actually do it? Using signatures as a solution is perfectly rational and makes sense, even if it isn't written in black and white in the Constitution. Only if nobody produces those signatures within the deadline should the task of forming the Cabinet be handed to the relative winner of the election. That's how it would play out in the real world. Just imagine if Zoran immediately gave Bero the mandate as the relative winner, and then three days later Plenković shows up with all the necessary signatures... it would be a total circus. Neither the President nor the parties would touch that with a ten-foot pole. It's just senseless.

If nobody brings the signatures, then yeah, you'd hand the formation over to the relative winner... but I doubt we'll ever actually see things get that messy.

It is far too early to speculate before the elections; there are still six weeks to go, and plenty of things can shift regarding the balance of power in that time.

George W. Bush was a seasoned fox and a veteran politician, so he untied the Gordiev knot in the way that was most convenient for him: "Bring me 76 signatures, and I'll give you the mandate."

The Constitution doesn't explicitly state this, but whoever holds the majority—even a relative one, since the Constitution isn't specific on that point—can receive the opportunity from the President to attempt to form the Cabinet and secure 76 votes in Congress. At the President's discretion, that first appointee can also be granted an additional 30 days to try and assemble the Cabinet and get it confirmed by Congress. It is both logical and democratic for the party or coalition holding the relative majority to be given the first shot.

If that first attempt fails, someone else will get an equal opportunity. That second person must be from the second-largest party or coalition.

Kolinda could have given the opportunity to Karamarko, but she lacks the intellect and the experience of Bush to step outside her comfortable decision-making zones. She didn't dare grant the mandate to form the government to Karamarko because she feared the backlash and the accusations that she was playing favorites with the Republican Party.

Zoran Milanović is fundamentally different from Kolinda; he won't hesitate or fear exercising his authority within the framework of the Constitution. Furthermore, I am convinced that Milanović will not engage in the kind of calculation or abuse of his position seen with Kolinda, who bypassed several steps laid out in the Constitution and was prepared to appoint a caretaker Cabinet regardless of the election results.

Eric Ortiz3 said:What do you mean, Bridge getting 10 seats?? If they manage to scrape together even 3, that’s a massive win. Getting more than 5 is practically impossible at this point. The party is falling apart right before our eyes. Just look at today—the top brass from the Bridge wing in the outskirts just walked out.
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party will likely end up deadlocked, leaving all the power in the hands of Škoro to break the tie.

A single power couple like Raspudić-Selak holds far more political weight than the likes of Ružica Vuković, Dobrović, and the rest of that crew whom nobody actually voted for. Those who cast their ballots for the Bridge party do so because of that famous trio, and now, that Mediterranean trio has been bolstered by several other heavy hitters.

Robin Jones2 said:Based on these poll results, if the Democratic Coalition emerges as the relative winner, could the President grant them the mandate to form The Cabinet?

If my memory serves me correctly, Bero would then have 30 days—plus potentially an additional 30—to attempt to assemble The Cabinet and secure its confirmation in Congress.

Regardless, Plenković will be forced to act with significant courage in the window between the election and the formal mandate to gather enough political chips, including potentially securing votes from Škoro.

However, there are still six weeks until the election, and anything can happen in that timeframe.

For instance, the economy will likely continue its downward trend. New scandals involving the Republican Party will inevitably surface, and there are certainly plenty of them. A significant portion of the American electorate is traditionally prone to short-term volatility; within just a few days, certain figures see their popularity either skyrocket or plummet. One need only look at the standing of Beroš, Capak, and Markotićka six weeks ago compared to where they stand today.

The Republican Party possesses a massive political machine and virtually unlimited campaign resources—be it taxpayer funds or whatever remains of them. They will spend their very last cent on the most absurd tactics just to claw back a few votes.

They might even go as far as arresting Karamarkov’s wife just to project an image of being fighters against corruption. Of course, such moves often backfire.

The prevailing sentiment among the majority is that they were unfairly targeted in the case of Karamarkov's spouse, so such maneuvers could easily damage their own ratings.

This is especially true when even the most naive voter understands that everything the Republican Party does over these next six weeks will be aimed solely and exclusively at winning votes and securing the election.

Where is this coming from? You leftists were the first ones complaining when people suggested Kolinda might give the mandate to Karamarko and demand 76 signatures. You should stick to that logic now. As for Zoran, honestly, I think he'd hand the mandate to Plenković before he ever gave it to Bero. Personally, I’d love to see a new government formed by Bridge and Škoro without that whole Republican-Democratic duo involved. Probably unrealistic, but hey, a person can dream until May 7th.😁

Jose Collins86 said:A single power couple like Raspudić-Selak holds far more political weight than the likes of Ružica Vuković, Dobrović, and the rest of that crew whom nobody actually voted for. Those who cast their ballots for the Bridge party do so because of that famous trio, and now, that Mediterranean trio has been bolstered by several other heavy hitters.

But what are we actually supposed to do with them? You've got two philosophers, a historian, a psychiatrist who clearly isn't interested in the job, and one local know-it-all. What kind of cabinet position could we possibly find for them?
As for Dubravka Alibegović, Dobrović, Kovačić, Panenić, or Strenja Linić... those folks have actually done things in their careers; they have some sort of professional standing. With the Raspudić couple, you might be able to hand them something involving education or maybe culture, and just let them run with it.

crimsonwolf26 said:But what are we actually supposed to do with them? You've got two philosophers, a historian, a psychiatrist who clearly isn't interested in the job, and one local know-it-all. What kind of cabinet position could we possibly find for them?
As for Dubravka Alibegović, Dobrović, Kovačić, Panenić, or Strenja Linić... those folks have actually done things in their careers; they have some sort of professional standing. With the Raspudić couple, you might be able to hand them something involving education or maybe culture, and just let them run with it.

We won't do anything with them. They will simply sit there as the "greatest intellectuals" in Congress and siphon off a portion of the electorate during these elections. We will finally have representatives on par with those from the 90s. Honestly, one only needs to compare the speeches of someone like Raspudić or Marija Selak to the rhetoric used by Dobrović, Kovačić, Strenja Linić, or Dubravka Alibegović... when I really think about it, I cannot recall a single meaningful speech from any of them throughout their entire four-year term in Congress. They are utterly colorless figures.

Jose Collins86 said:We won't do anything with them. They will simply sit there as the "greatest intellectuals" in Congress and siphon off a portion of the electorate during these elections. We will finally have representatives on par with those from the 90s. Honestly, one only needs to compare the speeches of someone like Raspudić or Marija Selak to the rhetoric used by Dobrović, Kovačić, Strenja Linić, or Dubravka Alibegović... when I really think about it, I cannot recall a single meaningful speech from any of them throughout their entire four-year term in Congress. They are utterly colorless figures.

Exactly, we won't get anything out of them🤣. Even that philosopher from Zadar who ran on the Bridge ticket had a few notable moments in Congress, but that was it—it came and went without making much of an impact.👍.

If these new "big money" types from the Libertarian Party actually manage to land seats in Congress—which wouldn't surprise me one bit—then they’ve already won. They get guaranteed salaries, they get to act as political pawns, and they even get a platform to speak on the floor. It’s a perfect setup for the Republican Party. Every single vote is pure gold when you need it. It’s quite convenient for these high-society intellectuals who haven't broken a sweat for the party in their lives. Clearly, the Libertarian Party is desperate, and these wealthy newcomers might be even more so. It’s calculated, and frankly, it lacks any shred of morality.🤦

Brenda Murphy3 said:It’s possible things could play out that way... but we're talking about a window of maybe one or two terms at most.
That’s exactly why I pointed out that Bernardić is going to have a massive headache if Škoro manages to scrape together 15 seats. We're sitting right at that 14-seat threshold. Plus, there's the question: would all those minority groups actually stick with the Democratic Party?

What I'm trying to get at is that Škoro represents a legitimate threat to the Democratic Party (though he's a problem for the Republican Party too, just in a different way). As we see in this study, the Democratic Party could technically emerge as a relatively convincing winner on paper, yet still find themselves completely short-handed when it comes to actually putting together a Cabinet.

Haven't we already seen how certain "minority" representatives are actually controlled—or rather, paid off—by other players on the political stage? 😉

"Quote:"

Brenda Murphy3 said:Look, everything you're saying is technically correct, but Zoran—and honestly, any other President—isn't going to go looking for an unnecessary constitutional crisis if they can help it. What’s the point in handing someone the mandate to form a government if it's blindingly obvious they can't actually do it? Using signatures as a solution is perfectly rational and makes sense, even if it isn't written in black and white in the Constitution. Only if nobody produces those signatures within the deadline should the task of forming the Cabinet be handed to the relative winner of the election. That's how it would play out in the real world. Just imagine if Zoran immediately gave Bero the mandate as the relative winner, and then three days later Plenković shows up with all the necessary signatures... it would be a total circus. Neither the President nor the parties would touch that with a ten-foot pole. It's just senseless.

If nobody brings the signatures, then yeah, you'd hand the formation over to the relative winner... but I doubt we'll ever actually see things get that messy.

You aren't exactly young enough to have forgotten Sanders's second term, especially with Friščić backing him up. You surely remember the media circus—including how The New York Times scrambled to align with Sanders's camp, which ultimately led to Sanja Modrić leaving the paper. There was all that noise about how Mason shouldn't even ask Sanders for support signatures, but should just hand over the mandate because he won the most votes.

Friščić didn't actually want to nominate Sanders—he certainly wasn't looking to hand him a majority that would secure him the role of Prime Minister. He just wanted to play the part of someone supporting Sanders out of necessity, pretending he had no choice because Sanders was the only one capable of pulling a majority together.

The news about Sanders’s legal situation is just more of the same. It seems like we're stuck in a loop of endless court dates and political theater. Expect nothing less.

"Quote:"

After some discussions, Mason claimed that Ivo Sanders convinced him he actually held over 77 mandates. Even though Sanders failed to provide any written proof to back that up.Mason claims that kind of evidence isn't even necessary.

Mark Hughes36 said:"Quote:"

You aren't exactly young enough to have forgotten Sanders's second term, especially with Friščić backing him up. You surely remember the media circus—including how The New York Times scrambled to align with Sanders's camp, which ultimately led to Sanja Modrić leaving the paper. There was all that noise about how Mason shouldn't even ask Sanders for support signatures, but should just hand over the mandate because he won the most votes.

Friščić didn't actually want to nominate Sanders—he certainly wasn't looking to hand him a majority that would secure him the role of Prime Minister. He just wanted to play the part of someone supporting Sanders out of necessity, pretending he had no choice because Sanders was the only one capable of pulling a majority together.

The news about Sanders’s legal situation is just more of the same. It seems like we're stuck in a loop of endless court dates and political theater. Expect nothing less.

"Quote:"

After some discussions, Mason claimed that Ivo Sanders convinced him he actually held over 77 mandates. Even though Sanders failed to provide any written proof to back that up.Mason claims that kind of evidence isn't even necessary.

Look, neither you nor our buddy Robin Jones2 are lying, per se, but what you're both saying just isn't grounded in reality. I don't know about you, but this guy clearly thinks Milanović would be forced (or choose) to give the mandate to form a government to Bernardić if the Democrats come out as the relative winners... regardless of any actual coalition potential. I'm telling you, that’s not happening, or at least I'm extremely skeptical about that scenario. Plus, there’s zero reason to even do it that way.

In this upcoming election, it’s totally plausible that the Democrats end up with 5-10 more seats than the Republicans, yet still have absolutely no mathematical way to form a government without Škoro (which effectively means they can't form The Government at all). So, what’s the point of even handing them the mandate to try?
Back with Mason and Sanders, there was definitely some maneuvering going on, but Mason clearly knew Sanders held the majority and gave him the mandate accordingly... anything else wouldn't have made any sense in the first place.

Personally, I don't really care either way, but handing someone the mandate when you know damn well they don't have a majority? That’s a recipe for an absolute nightmare of a situation.