What follows is my own personal comments and opinions only. 
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]We will present six specific policies during this term: Michel Manen: Leadership ? forward not back: We will propose a Bill setting up a new Legislative Advisory Body, made up of all heads of the CDS branches of government, to discuss Bill introduced by Representatives or citizens and to ensure that the final text will be professional, precise, and acceptable to all [/quote:2s9oxckv]
IMO this sounds mostly like it duplicates the existing duties of the SC except it adds some grammatical checking that is basically useless. It indicates to me that you are just not really aware of the current structure of the government you are fighting to overthrow.
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]Democracy ?the many not the few: we will introduce a Bill setting up citizens? study groups to actively involve as many of our citizens as possible in the legislative process, and not just once every six months, during elections. [/quote:2s9oxckv]
Again, you don't seem to be aware of how things already are. There are already study groups set up on some projects and issues and already the percentage of citizens that participate in the government is very high indeed relative to other governed sims or even RL governments. You constantly talk about the need to "include everyone" but give no real examples of anyone being specifically excluded. Who is actually being excluded here? I would like an answer on that before I even *consider* voting for your party.
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]Prosperity ? we will introduce a Bill to establish strategic marketing and advertising ?Emassies such as the Anzeri Info point in strategic sims in 2L to imake the CDS a hub of trade, tourism and commerce [/quote:2s9oxckv]
This is almost your first (semi) substantive policy even though it seems very vaguely described. The CDS certainly could use more of a high profile image, but your take on this sounds suspiciously like a standard business 101 marketing plan. Something you do for a product, not a country. In fact, almost every term you use in your literature absolutely *reeks* of standard 1st year business class lingo and marketing propaganda. Terms like [i:2s9oxckv]"single day, in/out decision making,"[/i:2s9oxckv] might go over well in the boardroom, but sound utterly ridiculous in the political context you put them in.
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]Diversity ? celebrating difference : enabling a creative community: we will introduce a Bill to enable th CDS to acquire and run its own radio station, open its waves to all our linguistic and cultural communities (Esperanto and French come to mind here), and raise funds by selling on-air advertisements [/quote:2s9oxckv]
Again, this is one of the more substantive policies (a radio station) and not a bad idea at that, but lamely and irresponsibly tacked onto your "diversity" section. The idea of a radio station really has nothing to do with "diversity" per se does it? This is what happens when you think of six buzz-words first and then try to fit some small policies into them.
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]Fairness ? a just, stable, professional judiciary and a publicly-owned information meda...[/quote:2s9oxckv]
Well here you are really grasping at straws again IMO. Is there anyone in the entire CDS that disagrees with the idea of having a judiciary? Even people like me that opposed the Judiciary bill from the first time they heard it are still in favour of *some* judiciary. do you really think everyone else somehow wants a *unprofessional* and *unstable* judiciary?? As for the CDS "media" (sic) I think that since it doesn't actually exist I don't really know what you are talking about. The various websites we currently have are all operated by representatives of the CDS government and other than the strictly utilitarian or informational sites all there is is the forums which are completely public and "diverse."
[quote="Michel Manen":2s9oxckv]Sustsainability ? we will introduce a bill requiring that our new sim be designed specifically to attract creative, knowledge workers and creatives and give them the space, incentives and time to con tribute the the development our community in 2L [/quote:2s9oxckv]
This is a policy I guess (although not very well fleshed out), but it seems to amount to having a giant sandbox for people to visit. I would agree that when we have a few more sims, using one as a giant sandbox and attracting creative people to the CDS in that way would be a good idea, but is it really financially feasible at this time? Likely not.
In summation, IMO you would have done substantially better to forget about all the glitz and marketing, the buzz-words, and the corporate approach with the numbered agendas, and merely present yourself as a new party with the three actual proposals you have put forward. (more marketing, internet radio station, and giant sandbox). A bit of discussion on those proposals, fleshing them out with more concrete ideas and plans for paying for these items would also help a lot.
Instead, your platform reads more like a slick business or marketing plan for a new type of soap and nothing like a political platform at all. A government is not a business, nor can it be run like one without running roughshod over the very people you purport to govern. If I didn't know better, I would guess that you are in fact engaged in some kind of term paper project to see if you can "take over" a virtual country through the exclusive use of business terms and procedures. And interesting experiment perhaps, but hardly anything I want to vote for.
Additionally, like many "business minded" proposals for government in RL and in SL, the few policies you have seem to be expensive. All three of your ideas would entail an [i:2s9oxckv]expense[/i:2s9oxckv] on the part of the CDS and yet you give little indication of where the money would come from. Does CARE envision a poll tax?
I must say that the fact it took me an hour to derive any kind of sense or content out of your platform is not a good sign of political maturity on your part. While I generally agree with the substance of the three proposals I was able to tweak out of the mix, IMO they are items that we should be thinking of "down the road," and not in our present financial state.
I am not interested in electing anyone that wants to spend money they don't actually [i:2s9oxckv]have[/i:2s9oxckv], on a few shiny ideas that haven't really been thought out.