Here, we may attempt to convicne others to the cause of your candidae with well argued facts and well thought up fiction.
BFW - sorry, the typo in the title made me sad.
edited by babelfishwars on 7/8/2016
The Bishop is mad, don’t vote for him, all I have to say here.
I sympathise with the Bishop’s crusade, but I think spreading awareness of the devils’ works is a more practical method than formally declaring hostilities against them. It may be ultimately better for his campaign if it gets a lot of attention but doesn’t lead to his election.
The Contrarian’s goals are noble, but I don’t know how effective his methods are - creating a lot of tension between the city’s various minority groups, particularly. Even if he succeeds, it’s a rather abstract sort of endeavour - the practical benefits in the short term will be limited.
Having done some investigating, I think Jenny is the best option. I will say why i think that in spoilers.
[spoiler]The Bishop is looking to play right into the devil’s hands since they part back him in secret and they have someone he cares for, the contrarian has ties to the Liberation Of Night (While he seeks a third way between The Bazzar and that, the Maneger Of The Royal Bethleham imples there is none).
Meanwhile Jenny recently cut any ties to the Masters and her bigest sin is blackmailing the rich and powerful which let’s face it is hardly bad.[/spoiler]
I myself often oppose the Devils. They have offended me in the past. Yet despite my personal affection for the Bishop – and despite my affection for beating Devils into tar whilst driving them from the Labyrinth – I find Sir Frederick is correct.
The correct way to oppose Devils is not through open war. It is through thwarting their goals – I do it by convincing people to not sell their souls and by finding and returning what souls I can to those who have lost them.
This is a far better course than attempting to start what will be a suicidal war for London.
For this reason, despite my personal friendship with Southwark, I must speak out in opposition to the Bishop for Mayor.
Sinning Jenny’s nomination smacks of cynicism, to me. Calling herself a literal bleeding heart and cutting her hand to accentuate the effect? Really? I also note that her political ambitions have no real history, unlike The Contrarian who was always interested in politics and The Bishop’s longstanding vendetta against Hell. Unless she has some philanthropic history I’m unaware of, Sinning Jenny’s supposed concern for the needy seems like a simple populist tactic. It really seems like a play for power, probably on behalf of The Sisterhood. And regarding what Kylestien says…
Jenny’s cutting ties with the Mr. Wines and blackmailing her former clients (how else would she get those secrets?) is very troubling to me. It seems to indicate that she places no importance on her promises and allegiances, only on achieving her goal. Say what you will about The Contrarian and The Bishop, I believe they’re actually interested in the future of the city, while Sinning Jenny…Her alliance with Mr. Wines was tactical, and I don’t imagine that her ‘alliance’ with the people of London is any different.
Jenny is part of an order of monster hunting ninja nuns. No further arguments should be necessary. None shall be given. You know what must be done.
Vote Jenny 1894!
Argus:
In that case, why cut ties with Wines at all? It is unlikly to be a attempt to convince the masses since very few would bother to investigate her funds. And convincing the masses she is not on the Masters side is the ONLY reason to cut ties with such a powerful group and potentialy make them enemies when running for a powerful position.
Kylestien:
Note that the investigation shows that Sinning Jenny cut ties with Wines only some time after her campaign began. Before that, she was perfectly willing to accept his lackeys as her campaign staff and let him bribe potential voters with alcohol. My guess is that she realized that sooner or later her political enemies will use her very well known connection to Mr. Wines against her, and so preemptively distanced herself from him. Besides, it’s not like the masters are going to support any other candidate, what with one being a single minded crusader and the other being a bona fide revolutionary.
Jenny is arguably the most sensible and down-to-earth (heh) candidate.
Vote Contrarian!
How else would sinning jenny get the blackmail material? Well she is connected to an ancient and powerful order of ninja nuns. That could gather her quite a few.
Jenny’s candidacy is cause for concern among the rich and powerful in London because, as has been demonstrated, neither her loyalty nor her silence can be bought. The "great and the good" would have you believe that this makes her dishonest and untrustworthy, which says more about their understanding of honesty and trust than about her character. Those with nothing to hide and nothing to lose understand that there is more to honesty and loyalty than allegiance to the almighty Echo, which is why she has their support and has offered her support to them in turn.
The Contrarian is a laudable public figure who has my respect for being willing to challenge any notion in order to test its value. He would be a terrible politician. If he is allowed to turn the new Mayoral position into one which does nothing but block and oppose whatever proposal is brought to it, then an office with the potential to effect change will be reduced to an impotent laughingstock. Rather that hamstring the position of Mayor before it has had the chance to do anything, I would rather have a candidate who aims to accomplish something rather than prevent anything.
And as for the Bishop, he is a well-intentioned fool, and so his unsuitability for office should be obvious. He is so caught up in the moral necessity of his ends (which I support) that he gives no thought to the proper means to accomplish them, and so plays into the hands of his enemies. An ounce of restrain would do him more good than a pound of bluster, but that is not a lesson he seems prepared to learn.
[quote=BillyBones]Jenny is arguably the most sensible and down-to-earth (heh) candidate.
Vote Contrarian![/quote]
I’m not even voting Contrarian, but that… is the most beautiful thing I’ve seen on the forums this entire election. 
(Kudos to you. ^_^ )
I don’t doubt the Jenny is loyal - to The Sisterhood. Her superior has decided that it is advantageous to their plans that she should run for office, and so she ran for office. Her platform plays on the despair of the weak and the sympathies of the powerful, and if the forums are to be believed it is very effective. Why, exactly, are any of you thinking there is any more to it? What makes you so sure of the purity of her intentions? The Contrarian and The Bishop have both acted in pursuit of their political goals before this election, while Sinning Jenny has always been an obedient soldier in the service of her organization, and nothing else. The Sisterhood isn’t the worst faction active in London by any stretch of the imagination, but it has proven itself quite ruthless in pursuit of its goals. The office of Mayor of London is a means to an end, and if you think that Jenny will nonetheless serve the people well in that office, well, there’s no accounting for taste. But let’s not delude ourselves into thinking that this is anything but a bid for power.
All right then here are my opinions the subject:
The Bishop:
I feel for him I really do. However a war is just a means not an end, unless he shows me a more concrete objective to the benefit of London I cannot in good conscience support him as a mayor, regardless of my personal support for his crusade.
Besides I do not think London is in a possition to challange the devils on open war… yet.
Jenny:
I do not know her, and do not trust her. Her methods of obtaining funding and support are troubling, yes she is blackmailing other people today, in the future with the resources of a mayor I am not too sure she would not use the same tactics with others only to sustain her power base.
Not to mention blackmailing generates grudges, in time the powerful in society would get tired of her and band together to undermine her or her authority regardless of the amount of blackmail she has on them.
Besides we only have promises about caring for the less fortunate without any tangible proposition, (What is she supposed to do with her power as a mayor?). Finally we do not know what her endgame as a character is, what if she is really the masters’ puppet and just cut ties with Mr. Wines for a pretense? Still out of the 3 she seems to be the best option on the short term (assuming her concern for the common man is not a farce).
Contrarian:
His connections to the revolution are troubling, and I have no interest in supporting the LoN.
Still the more I investigate him the more I like him, he tries to free London of the Bazzar without extreme measures, in spite of the manager telling him that there is no way for this to happen he tries anyway. This, I believe, is the best way for London, we won’t really know if there is a way for a way to free London of the masters without extreme measures unless you try it first.
Still given his character and his actions in the past is very obvious he would try to debate any change in policy making him unsuited for the position in the short term, any change would have to go through a very lengthy process with him which would probably stop bureaucracy on its tracks.
Still I believe the contrarian’s objectives make him the best candidate for the long term wellbeing of London and as such he has my support.
Edit: damn spoiler tags never work for me the way the should
edited by Fincar on 7/8/2016
edited by Fincar on 7/8/2016
You can only have one spoiler tag in a message, including any spoiler tags in anything you are quoting. Or at least that’s the way it has always worked for me.
This has caused me untold anguish, and any mayoral candidate that promised to change that would have my vote in an instant.
The problem comes in when you consider that despite the fact that he’s running on a "Devils must go" platform and the fact that he wants to go to war with Hell himself (raising an army and all that), the Bishop has never intimated war as his next step. In fact when you join up with him he effectively says ‘We’ll kick out every last devil-’ proceeds to be pulled aside by an advisor and begrudgingly amends himself saying ‘We’ll curtail their diplomatic status grumble grumble’ As of yet, he’s not calling for war, I’m sure he’d love to, but even in other instances where you yourself say ‘Let’s go to War!’ he says "Cool, let’s wait until we’re quite ready first". [li]
Yes. She worries me because someone who will knowingly poison people for a bribe and blackmail customers who almost certainly paid for discretion, or assumed they did is not someone i trust more than a known revolutionary moderate. She will let you think you bought them- selling you a kiss and poisoning her lipstick, selling services with an implicit promise of discretion, if not an explicit one, considering this is mr. wine’s business- without ever selling them, and i have no way of knowing if she’s pulling the same trick here.
She has backstabbing tendencies, and expects not to be shunned for her job, yet treats it with all the honor of the shunned prostitutes, as opposed to the substantial discretion of the rest of the parlour.
Either the job is noble or at least as valid as any other profession, in which case this behavior disgraces it- or it’s not, in which case it’s like the chef who spits in your food or the writer (who can "bang some words together" and will be paid a single echo in rats) who mocks your cause in a way that anyone who has ears to hear can hear. But for the best in the business, she sure doesn’t treat her customers well.
edited by Grenem on 7/8/2016
Good point- it’s easy to forget that. Even so, his entire platform is "I hate devils, let’s make the soul trade harder for them". which without the war with hell part is better- but i don’t give an ounce over these so-called souls.
[/li]
Might one suspect that to keep the Devil’s out the Bishop might build a wall?
I’m just saying that there are similarities.