Gila Bend Settles Electoral Stalemate with Groundbreaking 'Chance-Based Governance' Initiative

In a move that has political scientists frantically updating their 'Democracy' flowcharts, the town council of Gila Bend, Arizona, has definitively proven that the purest form of civic duty is, in fact, a game of high-stakes Go Fish. After two highly qualified candidates for a coveted council seat found themselves locked in an unbreakable tie, local officials, with the solemnity usually reserved for announcing impending meteor strikes, revealed their adherence to a century-old state statute mandating that 'any electoral deadlock shall be resolved by the whims of a shuffled deck.' The nail-biting showdown involved Council Member-designate A drawing a deuce to his opponent Council Member-designate B's eight, thus securing the future of local zoning ordinances and pothole repair schedules with the same deliberative process one might use to decide who pays for the next round of lukewarm beer. Critics have pointed out that this system, while refreshingly transparent in its arbitrary nature, might set a worrying precedent for future legislative processes. Imagine, if you will, the next budget negotiation being settled by a rousing game of 'War,' or critical infrastructure planning hinging on who can bluff better in a poker game. Gila Bend, however, remains undeterred, reportedly already exploring options for a 'Best of Three' Rock-Paper-Scissors rule for future gubernatorial races.