Presidential Election Game

Description
In this game, you are running a campaign to become President of the United States. You must decide your strategy in campaigning, including where you spend your time and money, what positions you take on issues, which issues you emphasize, and how you present yourself. The game takes place essentially in 2016, with some minor changes. These changes are mainly that all of the politicians are made up, and some current events changes.

Resources
The goal of the game is to win the election. To do this, you need to win both the primaries and the general election. There are five "resources" which affect your ability to win. These are: Name recognition is how much people know your name, and know who you are. This gives you a bigger amount of people to convince to vote for you and gives you a better chance of doing well early on in the race. Trustworthiness is very important for many independent voters and is the trust that voters have that you will keep your promises, believe what you say, and are not corrupt. Likability is the appeal the candidate have as a person, and how much the voters would want to meet the candidate. Fundraising is the ability to raise money, it is key for being able to stay in the race and spend on commercials. Finally, legitimacy is the voters' view of the candidate as viable, experienced, a good speaker, and in the primary the belief that they could win the general election.
 * Name Recognition
 * Trustworthiness
 * Likability
 * Fundraising
 * Legitimacy

Groups
There are several groups of people (for example religions, factions within a party, races, economic classes, etc.), and each group has a general position on each issue, different priorities on different issues, and they will have different views for each candidate. Each state has a different mix of these groups, and candidates have a different amount of the resources among each group. However, it is important to determine which groups you want to gain support from, and as a result determine where you will campaign. Every category has a group of "other" or "mixed", which will be counted as more of the national average. Below are a list of the groups :

Racial: Religious: Economic Class: Education: Gender/Sexual Orientation
 * White
 * Black
 * Hispanic/Latino
 * Asian/Pacific Islander
 * Mixed Race
 * Unidentified/Atheist/Agnostic
 * Evangelical Protestant
 * Mainline Protestant
 * Catholic
 * Mormon
 * Jewish
 * Muslim
 * Lower Class/Poverty
 * Middle Class
 * Upper Middle Class
 * Very Rich
 * No High School Degree
 * High School Degree
 * College Degree
 * Advanced Degree
 * Current Student
 * Heterosexual Men
 * Heterosexual Women
 * LGBT

Current Political Situation
This is still being constructed, and is not complete yet:

Backstory (Presidential Election Game)

How to Join
Candidates can join until January 15th, when the primary campaigning will begin. Candidates can join after that but will be at a disadvantage. ONLY REALISTIC CANDIDATES ARE ALLOWED, NO TROLLING. Furthermore,  'only candidates who fit the constitutional requirements and have answered a good amount of the policy questions will be accepted. All candidates who do not meet this criteria will be ruled out on January 25th.'  To join, you must fill out the following form in the talk page :
 * Candidate Name:
 * Age:
 * Gender:
 * Religion (include denomination):
 * Race:
 * Party Affiliation:
 * Home State:
 * State of Birth:
 * Current Job:
 * Past Government Positions (if applicable):
 * Job before Politics (usually lawyer, soldier, businessman, etc.):
 * Issue most stressed:
 * Secondary Issue:
 * Campaign Slogan:
 * Other Notes:

Candidates

 * Democrat
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (IL)
 * Senator Robert McCarthy (CT)
 * Senator John Callison (VA)
 * Senator Lelia Afewerek (MN)
 * Abdallah Salem (NY)
 * Governor Eric Harjo (NY)
 * Senator Cameron (MN)
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (MA)
 * Governor Amy Haas (VA)
 * Republican
 * Senator Morgan Ryder (TX)
 * Senator Ralph Turnip (OR)
 * Representative Richard Thorpe (ID)
 * Senator Richard A. "Rocky" Champion (PA)
 * Secretary of State Alexander Whitmore (PA)
 * Libertarian
 * Governor Ron Jones (KY)
 * Senator Luke Recks (NH)
 * Independent
 * Mayor Abram Klements (CA)

Current Polls
Libertarian, Democratic, and Republican national, Iowa, and New Hampshire polls will all come on January 25th.

Endorsements
Libertarian, Democratic, and Republican endorsements will begin to come on January 25th.

Current Issues
Please comment your responses to the following questions. Part of your strategy is when you answer these questions, including whether you spread out the answers, answer them immediately, or answer them later. For these questions, you can answer the obvious answers (such as pro-choice and pro-life) or some sort of middle ground (pro-life except in cases of rape). The real election season will not start until January 25th, and until then, please answer all of the following 39 questions.

Domestic Issues

 * What is your position on gay marriage?
 * Senator Ryder: Civil Union but not Marriage
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Civil Union only.
 * Senator McCarthy: We should certainly encourage the LGBT community to marry each other as they please.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): As written in Libertarian doctrine, personal rights shall not be determined by government. LGBT's should be allowed to marry and care for children as they so please.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): I don't think that, as a politician, I should determine who is allowed to get married or not. The consistent libertarian position is to get government out of the marriage business altogether and eliminate the penalties government thrusts upon American citizens based off personal decisions.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Wholly legal without restriction.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): There should be no difference between a straight marriage and a gay marriage. It should simply be called 'Marriage'. Same-Sex relationships and marriages should not be restricted in any way by the government.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: I think this whole "debate" on gay marriage is the biggest time filler created by the news media in the history of the nation. Many conservatives have recently "came out" in favor of civil unions in an effort to remain relevant, but the fact of the matter is, a "civil union" is legalese for government-licensed marriage itself. I honestly have no problem with gays getting married, but let's please leave this debacle to the vultures and move on with more important things.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): The federal government should not interfere with marriage until the point of severe legal and moral issues, such as pedophilia, bestiality, or incest. When I am elected president I will remove federal sanctions on marriage and allow the people to decide who they want to marry.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): I believe marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Civil unions are for those who prefer the non-traditional relationships, and that should be how it is. As president, I will keep this as the status quo, and go so far as to ensure that the Constitution of the United States is amended to keep it that way. We should not be held whim to the sexual proclivities of a minority seeking to twist what has been the norm for every human civilization for the last six thousand years of recorded history. I believe societies acceptance of such behavior can be linked with the media's aggressive policing of free speech, condemning what people's attitudes had been no more than 10-15 years ago, and promoting sexual behaviors which most regarded as obscene for no other reason than to feel better about their identity. As a moral people, we cannot accept immoral behavior, no matter how far we wish to justify such obscenities.
 * Governor Eric Harjo (D-NY): Civil Union only. Also, I didn't like those LGBT flags flying, as we should weakened LGBT community in United States by banning LGBT flags and images for public use, while private is well okay.
 * Senator Cameron: No restriction on marriage unless moral boundaries are crossed such as pedophilia, bestiality and incest. If I am elected president I will remove most federal marriage restrictions.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe marriage is a union between a man and a woman. That being said, I do support an equal civil union equivalent for unions of the same sex. However, I will not change the current situation in this country until such equivalent is ready.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): As a Roman Catholic, I believe that marriage ought to be a union between a man and a woman, however, this only means that I shall personally express my disagreement with churches allowing same-sex marriage. The marriage we are talking about is more or less a civil union with a more impactful name, therefore, as a person who strongly believes in the equal rights of all people, I don't see quite a problem with LGBT people having a civil union that they call marriage. On the other hand, I still see myself internally conflicted on this issue, which means I will let the people of this great nation decide, but I will encourage the discussion and debate of the issue.
 * Governor Amy Haas (D-VA): I firmly believe that all Americans deserve to love who they love and marry whomever they fall in love with. We cling to our definitions of marriage without thinking about who we push to the side when we articulate such definitions. Civil Unions are a means to an end--marriage equality. We cannot deny same-sex couples the benefits that come with traditional marriage. Too many Americans will be held back in starting their lives if we don't. Personal views aside, we cannot deny our fellow Americans the right to love and all the benefits thereto.
 * What is your position on abortion?
 * Senator Ryder: Ban after nine weeks.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I have no issues with abortion. It current statue is enough and good for everyone.
 * Senator McCarthy: I am certainly pro-choice.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): Abortion has been one of the most divisive issues in American politics since Roe vs. Wade was decided over 40 years ago. While I am personally opposed to abortions, I don't see the government as having a role in forcing its opinion upon all of the American populace.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): The government must end its war on women by providing additional funding and preventing states from placing unconstitutional restrictions on abortion, as seen in Texas and Alabama. That said, the standards set out by Roe vs. Wade seem fair guidelines.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Similar to Senator Recks, I myself dislike abortion. Yet my opinion should not influence the choice of women nationwide. While I am totally opposed to abortion being used as a sort of birth control, I have yet to see it implemented in such a fashion. Abortion should be legal as long as a certified doctor says it would be safe for the woman undergoing the procedure.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Abortion has been a very broad and controversial topic for many years. Since people from different parts of the country cannot decide the national position on abortion, I propose individual states choose their position on this.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: As usual, the debate on abortion has degenerated into partisan nose-thumbing. People make a lot of noise about all of the special cases in which the mother's life is threatened, but they really only constitute a small percentage of all abortions. In the majority of cases, it's a conflict of liberties (right to life vs right to control one's body). As far as I'm concerned, the current laws have served us well enough, and have given us safe and humane abortions, so I say we keep Roe vs Wade.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): Abortion should only be an option if the mother was raped, underage, or if the mother suffers from any form of disability or disease that would threaten her life if she was to bear or give birth to a child.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Abortion is wrong. I say this as a father and a husband. You may wish to dehumanize the life growing within a mother by calling it a "parasite" or a "cluster of cells", but it will always remain a growing human life. Abortion doesn't benefit the mother. Rather it harms her. Studies regarding the aftermath of an abortion have shown that women who abort are more likely to suffer emotional depression as a result of their actions, and this haunts them well into their later years. My mother had an abortion once, and only once. She told me how it hurt her emotionally. How it upset her that she deprive her unborn child the right to life. She cried about it and never forgot that decision. Women who abort, in my honest opinion, anger me. They put themselves in a position of emotion distress over an issue of "women's rights". No person, not even a woman, has the right to deny life to the unborn. And you need only look at the adverse effects of abortion on a woman after the fact to see proof of that.
 * Governor Eric Harjo (D-NY): Abortion is killing new-born babies! How about watching young children die? No it wouldn't happen same again! We must stop and ban Abortion immediately!
 * Senator Cameron: The government should not interfere with abortion
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I think women should take responsibility for their actions and know the risks of unprotected sex. As such I think abortion should be outlawed except in cases of rape, incest and a significant health risk to the mother. However, I do support some forms of contraception for safe sex.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Abortion is in my eyes highly akin to murder. Although it is debatable whether or not the child is considered a human being immediately after conception, it is undeniable that it has a high potential of becoming one. This if for example why children have certain legal rights even before being born. Personally I would never recommend a woman to have an abortion unless there are serious health implications, and I consider myself pro-life in some way, as I would rather help both the mother and her child to overcome the issue because of which she considered abortion in the first place. A safe enviroment must be created for all American children. But this does not mean I would ban abortions. It's called pro-choice because even in the hardest of times, facing innumerable quarrels, we must have our right to choose our own path. After all, this is the land of the free, a beacon of democracy. This is why we must, with some concern, allow abortion in the early periods of pregnancy. After all, it's better than coat hangers.
 * Governor Amy Haas: I am shocked to hear what some candidates have to say about a woman's right to choose, especially those of my fellow Democrats. Whether or not a woman receives an abortion is that woman's business, not the government's. I stand with women and their right to choose.
 * How much funding should Planned Parenthood receive from the federal government?
 * Senator Ryder: Some.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Some.
 * Senator McCarthy: Not too much as to completely drain our budget, but enough so that it can continue to successfully encourage birth control and proper reproductive health services to all women in this country.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): As much as necessary to ensure that reproductive health services are widely available.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Planned Parenthood is essential to the lives of some women, it offers healthcare, not just abortions, to women that are underprivileged and should definitely be funded by the federal government.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): The federal government should not fund any member or body of the private sector unless it affects the federal government itself. My official stance is to cut funding to Planned Parenthood and any other private agency that does not affect the federal government.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Planned Parenthood should be allowed to have government funding. Somehow during the years, some of forgotten that the organization does more than provide abortions, but also provided assistance to women needed prenatal treatment, advice on gender-related issues, therapy for new mothers suffering from postpartum depression, and more. We need only deal with the issues related to abortion. The institution that helps women in more than one way need not be torn down for but one glaring issue.
 * Governor Eric Harjo (D-NY): Some.
 * Senator Cameron: Enough to keep it running. However, if budget cuts are necessary we will carefully review our funding of Planned Parenthood.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As President, my budget will not fund Planned Parenthood. That is not because I hate the organization or am opposed to abortions. It is because my budget will not fund a variety of nonessential services in exchange for a heft deduction in taxes and simplifying healthcare for all Americans. To me, it isn't a question or not of whether Planned Parenthood should receive federal funds as it is whether any nonprofit should receive federal funds, and that answer is no.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe this organization could do with some funding as long as it complies with federal regulations.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Planned Parenthood, albeit although offering them, is an excellent way to also decrease abortions. By helping future parents be more careful about the life changing decision of having a child, we will create happier families. This institution ought to receive the funding it needs to cover its cost, however due to the part of it which does medical examining, perhaps we could organize internships for medical technicians at PP in order to both have decreased spending and a way for the future workers of America to have a place where they could prepare themselves and gain work experience.
 * Governor Amy Haas: Yes. Planned Parenthood needs federal funding to provide its essential services to families. Too many candidates have conflated Planned Parenthood with just abortion when, in actuality, only about 3% of its services include abortion. We must ensure that people have access to critical services like disease screenings, safe abortions, and many more.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): I would defund planned parenthood not because of any abortion related issues, but because it only wastes people's tax dollars. For example, how would you feel funding somebody else's mistake? Planned Parenthood should run like any other charity, not be treated like a special government pet.
 * What restrictions do you support on the purchase of guns and ammunition?
 * Senator Ryder: If you have been to prison for more than a year or have a mental health issue. Plus no automatic weapons - otherwise go nuts.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I oppose the restrictions on guns, as every American must be able to access needs to protect himself. We have the right to protect ourselves and our country.
 * Senator McCarthy: We should limit the accessibility of guns to the general public, especially former criminals and the mentally ill. The Constitution says that a "well-organized militia" should have the right to bear arms, not the general public.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): We must end the spate of recent mass shooting by drastically reducing the availability of guns, especially automatic weapons, which should be banned, and implementing full background checks on all gun purchasers, as well as ensuring that all gun sales are regulated. The Second Amendment is, like any other right, qualified.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): There must be a background check implemented on the sale of all guns that would not allow those who have been to prison for a major offense or the mentally unstable to buy a gun. Also, automatic weapons must be made illegal, no one needs such a dangerous weapon, it would most definitely not be very helpful for self defense.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): Here's the problem: the asker presumes us to support restrictions on gun ownership! We ought to be asked whether or not we support restrictions at all - and the clear answer is that any restriction on gun rights is unconstitutional! As Governor of New Hampshire, I supported open carry without licensure, and as a Senator, I've been a vocal supporter of national concealed-carry reciprocity, a fight we will win if I am elected President.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Perhaps we should look at the Second Amendment, "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It already has been shown that more guns equal less crime, so why should there be restrictions? Most mass shootings were in areas that were gun free zones (the recent Paris attacks as an example). If I'm elected president, you will be able to protect yourself confidently, knowing that I don't want to change your restriction on what you want to protect yourself with.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: People have been completely misled on gun control. Nobody cares about facts for their own sake anymore, instead both sides distort them to push their own agendas. Violent crime in the US has steadily declined since its hey dey in the 1920s, but we still lead developed nations in gun violence. However, the "leading developed nations in gun violence" statistic is frequently pulled out of context, with liberals claiming that the US has the highest rate of violent crime/murder in the developed world. This is false. Many European nations have higher rates of murder than the US, and do you honestly care whether someone uses a gun, knife, their fists, or whatever to kill someone? Death is death. Granted, we need to shore up background checks and the like to discourage mass shootings, but we need to adopt policies that don't restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans to own guns to preserve our right to bear arms while maximizing national security.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): If we were to increase, or even continue, restrictions on firearms and ammunition, we would be reentering the tyranny we faced over 225 years ago when the Union Jack flew over what is now our great nation. If anything, we should loosen the restriction on firearms and ammunition. Look at Chicago, for example. Chicago has one of the highest violent crime rates in the nation and also possesses the strictest gun control laws in the country.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): We must understand two things. First, the Second Amendment was solely for the militia. Though the Supreme Court "clarified" this matter, no doubt with plenty of NRA lobbying, the spirit of the amendment was that of an issue related to the state of the country in the 1700s. Second, most Americans are not gun owners, and support comprehensive gun laws. Many Americans are appalled by the lack of true regulatory laws on gun ownership, and want the laws to be changed to that effect. Guns have their place in American society, but we lack a culture that gives gun ownership the proper respect with regards to their usage and place in the country. I wish to regulate military-grade weapons, and leave on sporting guns and guns for self-defense below the 9mm range to the public. There is no reason a man or a woman needs a heavy combat rifle. We've romanticized weaponry to the point that the ownership of a gun for self-defense has exploded into an orgy of gun glorification.
 * Senator Cameron: Guns have become an evermore divisive issue in American politics due to terrorism and the rise of gun violence. I believe an enhancement of background checks are necessary. Also I believe in the restriction of assault weapons allowing only those who have undergone training and background checks to own them. We must also improve our treatment of mental disabilities.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe that convicted felons should be prohibited from obtaining weapons. I think enhanced background checks are not as scary as some would believe. I think some things we should also be doing is to enhance mental health treatment in this country and also stop aggrandizing mass shooters, who do not deserve to be known.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): The 2nd amendment is clear, however I believe convicted felons and people diagnosed with mental health issues shouldn't be able to posses them. Moreover, automatic weapons are quite dangerous and completely unneeded for self-defense. But as an American, I am aware that a gun culture exists, and that it is one of the things that makes our country unique and great. We sometimes do not own guns because of defense, but because of their artistic value, which is why I would allow the ownership of a wide range of guns for gun collectors. On the other hand, the ammunition for such dangerous weapons would be unaccessible in order to ensure safety for our fellow citizens.
 * Governor Amy Haas: We are the only advanced, industrial economy in the world that has the sheer level of gun violence that we have experienced for so many years. My own state has experienced such tragedies, like the Virginia Tech shooting some years ago. We must implement common sense legislation to protect American citizens while respecting the right to bear arms. We must reinstate the assault weapons ban and close the gun show loophole. Universal background checks must be implemented on a federal level. Those who are on the no-fly list should not be able to purchase guns, so we keep them out of the hands of potential terrorists. As president, I will make sure these policies are implemented--as I have in my own state--and stand up to the gun lobby in Congress.
 * Should marijuana be decriminalized?
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY) - Yes, though the public must be informed of its side effects on the human body and the ingredients in the drug. Libertarian doctrine says that Personal freedoms should not be determined by the government.
 * Senator Ryder: No.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): No.
 * Senator McCarthy: Yes. Marijuana has been proven to be less harmful for your long-term health than cigarettes and alcohol, and we could easily put a tax on marijuana in order to increase our income.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Marijuana should be legalized, and preferably monopolized by the government as seen in Colorado. Not only that, but we should follow Portugal's lead by making possession of ten days' or less supply of any drug an administrative rather than criminal offence (i.e. subject only to fines).
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Yes, as we have seen in Ireland, where all drugs were decriminalized and only the selling of drugs made criminal, crime has decreased. Furthermore, the legalization of Marijuana would have a positive effect on the country's economy as it can be taxed easily. Also, Marijuana is not nearly as harmful as tobacco and alcohol, which are legal, so the death toll would not likely increase due to the legalization of Marijuana.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): Marijuana should not only be decriminalized, it should be legalized for all citizens to be able to use responsibly. Studies are showing the drug to be safer than alcohol and tobacco, and instead of allowing American adults to make their own decisions we are throwing more non-violent individuals into jail than nations like China, Russia, and Iran. It's time to take the bold step forward by legalizing marijuana nationally.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: As a university student in UCLA and later a resident of the artist's colony of Mendocino, I can say I have a fair share of experience regarding marijuana (it's a wonder some of you trust me when I open my mouth regarding other subjects). Though marijuana can be used recreationally and successfully taxed and regulated, if we fully legalize marijuana, we will not be just letting a couple of hippies pass around a joint in their basement in peace, we will be inevitably creating a "big tobacco"-style machine that runs on addiction and dependence. Now I honestly think that there is no problem with legalizing marijuana if we regulate it heavily, especially preventing a marijuana lobby from emerging (and cutting down on other lobbyists, but that's a whole other story...)
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): Marijuana should certainly be legalized and taxed across the nation. The legalization of marijuana would make the activity of smoking the substance less taboo and "rebellious," as well as generate more revenue for our economy and our nation as a whole.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Absolutely not. I say this as a Chicago-native. In my youth, I saw the use of marijuana led to the use of stronger drugs, which destroyed communities and people as productive members of society. What few people tend to realize is that weed is a gateway drug, one which sees the brain develop a resistance to the high weed provides, and leads to the individual seeking a stronger high, one which marijuana doesn't provide. Furthermore, the THC levels in marijuana destroys brain cells. You may have television doctors try to sell you the myth that that isn't the case, but it is. Many users of the drug are underage, and their brains are still developing. Imagine the effect a mind-destroying drug has on a person who's mind is still developing? Is that the type of person, the type of generation we want to replace us in thirty to forty years? I refuse to allow such a narcotic on the streets of America.
 * Governor Eric Harjo (D-NY): No. Marijuana must be banned forever!
 * Senator Cameron: Marijuana offences should be reduced to misdemeanors rather than felonies. This will lower costs and have less non violent people in jail.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I agree with Senator Cameron, although I think those guilty of selling the drug should be punished appropriately.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Marijuana is a vice, no doubt in that. Excessive use of any drug, be it marijuana, alcohol, coffee or cigarettes is not healthy nor helpful. But then again, we allow these others drugs, some of which are much more dangerous both directly and indirectly, so why wouldn't we legalise marijuana? At least from a medicinal perspective it seems viable. Each state should however be given the option to decide whether or not it wants to allow recreational use. But I must state that I agree with Senator Cameron, either way it ought to be considered a misdemeanor and not a felony.
 * Governor Amy Haas: I am willing to see to the  legalization of marijuana under my administration. States like Washington and Colorado have succeeded and have even created budget surpluses as a result. I understand that the criminalization of marijuana has led to an uneven imprisonment of Black and Latino men, creating a whole separate criminal justice issue.
 * Should corporations be able to fund campaigns through PACs?
 * Senator Ryder: Yes.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): It is a free country.
 * Senator McCarthy: I believe so. While there is a small risk of corruption, their intentions are almost always for the greater good of us politicians.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): No, corporate money is destroying the political process and making politicians beholden to wealthy interests.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Super PACs allow companies to buy candidates and are a form of legal corruption, it allows companies to have more of a hand in the government than citizens, ruining the democracy this country stands for. Anyone who says otherwise has likely taken major contributions from large, private enterprises.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): While I don't have a problem with super PACs funding campaigns, our current system is stacked unfairly against the everyday American. Middle class Americans are limited in how much they can donate to their favorite candidates while big business has no such limitation. If its your legally-earned money, then you should be able to spend it however you please.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Of course not. Super PACs are essentially a form of legalized corruption that have, through gentleman's agreements and legal fiction, come to strangle our nation and prevent our nation from working in the way it was intended to. How else can you explain a nation where the vast majority of Americans are untrustworthy of our government, but we have political dynasties dominating politics? We need to outlaw Super PACs and restore the legitimacy of our government.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): If you allow corporations to fund candidates through super PACs, then you are allowing corporate interests to pollute the political process, and buy politicians who will naturally side with them rather than the American people. That is a form of corruption that no true American would ever allow. At least I hope that would be the case. Must we bring up the example of BP and their use of bribes and lobbying to allow them to skirt the regulations place on them, that effectively polluted the Gulf of Mexico?
 * Senator Cameron: I agree with the Vice President and feel Super PACs only exist to support the best interests of a company not the people. Super PACs pollute the political process.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: So far as I'm concerned, as long as unions are able to do so, it would be hypocritical to prevent companies from doing the same. Unless both are banned, neither should be.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Companies are a part of our successful capitalist society, and that is why they should have a say in politics, however Super PACs, as many of my adversaries already states, are a means of corrupting the politician and I do not see a point in them. There ought to be a reasonable limit put on the amount of money one can receive from companies.
 * Governor Amy Haas: The business world is the business world and the political world is the political world. The ability of corporations to flood our democracy with unaccountable money must end. It gives the wealthy in this country a disproportionate say in our nation's political decisions, all while making Congress less accountable to the every day American. I won my governor's race in 2013 with a majority of my donations coming from middle-income people. I am accountable to the people and not corporate interests. The White House (and Congress for that matter) should not be for sale to the highest bidder.
 * Should the NSA be able to collect phone records?
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY) - No. The government has no right to interfere with the right of the people's 4th amendment right to not have their property searched for information. The government has no right to see or hear whatever you say, think, or do.
 * Senator Ryder: If they are of suspect nature or background such as having the name Mohammed, Yes.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Yes, as this is an important part of the job the NSA does to protect our country against terrorism.
 * Senator McCarthy: If they are suspected terrorists or criminals, yes. Everyone else should be allowed to keep their privacy.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Only under strict judicial oversight, with the same restrictions as are applied to search warrants.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Terrorism is a serious threat to this country, the NSA helps keep us safe. However, phone records of every average joe, shouldn't be collected. The NSA should only keep its eyes on suspected criminals in order to prevent crime and terrorism.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The right of the people to be secure in their persons is enshrined in our Bill of Rights. The PATRIOT Act and the NSA's bulk collection of metadata not only directly contradict our Constitution, but they also make it more difficult to spot terrorists because of the piles of non-terrorist data that is being picked up by the millions. Reforming the NSA will not only preserve freedoms, but it will also make our nation safer against terrorism.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): The NSA should be strictly forbidden from monitoring anyone and everyone at any time. The only time the NSA should be allowed to conduct surveillance is through a warrant. If there is no warrant, then the surveillance is unconstitutional and highly illegal.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens. However, that right does not allow it to spy on its citizens. When you allow the government to spy on the people, the people are left to the whims of an oppressive government that completely defies the rights of privacy every American is entitled to. The NSA should have known better, but being a government agency, any relaxation of regulation of their abilities is one which they accepted with open arms. I will stop this, and find better ways of protecting the people if I must.
 * Senator Cameron: The government has no right to collect the records of every single citizens. The government should be required to have warrants to search records. This will increase the amount of privacy law-abiding citizens have.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: Yes, as long as the NSA obtains a warrant before spying on American citizens. If there is significant reason behind the request, the NSA should have no trouble in obtaining a warrant and complying with the 4th Amendment.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Protecting our state is important, but so is protecting our people's right to privacy. I believe that the NSA should be able to investigate in citizens that are suspects, but not anyone they want. There ought to be regulations put in place in order to ensure that only wrongdoers must be worried.
 * Governor Amy Haas: The NSA has gone overboard. With the revelation of the Prism program and the leaks made public by Edward Snowden, it has become evident that the NSA has been given a blank check and compromised the privacy of American citizens. That needs to end. I am all for national security, but we risk becoming an Orwellian society if we let fear take precedence over individial freedoms enshrined in our Constitution. As president, I will make sure that our freedoms aren't compromised by spying. I will put in place specific measures that include Congressional and judicial oversight to ensure that no citizen of this country will be spied on without having a warrant.
 * Should the government raise the retirement age for Social Security?
 * Senator Ryder: No.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): It is something we should consider.
 * Senator McCarthy: No. The age of 65 is a good enough age for us to begin providing Social Security, and raising the retirement age isn't going to be that beneficial to us in the long run.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY) - The government should just cut the program. It's a waste of taxpayer's dollars and would only save Americans and seniors on their taxes; think of it as a discounted check.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): The government should be doing more, not less, to help low-income seniors. No.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): No, there are many people age 65 who already find it hard to retire due to taxes taken by the government. We should consider lowering the amount of taxes we take from Social Security.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): When Social Security was adopted back in the 1930s, its purpose wasn't to provide an income for retired folks. It was meant to prevent the extremely old from falling into poverty; indeed, the average life expectancy in 1935 was less than 65! Over time, we must restore Social Security to its rightful place as insurance for those who outlast their retirement saving and live beyond their average life expectancy.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): With technology rapidly improving and our lifespans increase with an ever-growing population, we need to realize that people are going to be able to work for more of their life, and that with the elderly living longer, Social Security will eventually become too expensive to maintain. We need to raise the age in accordance with modern day technology, medicine, and lifespans.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): My colleague Senator Champion is correct. Social Security will become too expensive to maintain as it will require the government to support individuals who can work and still provide for themselves, but has opted to retire and have the government support them until they die. Given that the average American is living far longer than they had when I was born, I believe that the retirement age should be raised. Naturally, many left-leaning members of the government and those who identify with the left in society, will oppose this, but what they either do not understand or refuse to accept, is that we simply cannot maintain such a system with the age set as low as it is. We should strive to adopt a system similar to Germany's. That nation has a populace with a strong work ethnic, with members of the German nation working well into their 70s and even 80s before retiring. They can work and they do. When they can't work then they appeal to the government for retirement benefits, and that is how it should be. That is my goal for the presidency.
 * Senator Cameron: I agree with my colleague Senator Champion and feel the Social Security age should be increased. However, low income seniors should have the option for early Social Security.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: It is something that should be seriously considered.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): As many of the other candidates stated, it was created in a different time. We are now living longer and we must work longer before we can relax. And why not? Work fulfills man with happiness and allows him to give back to society. I would raise it to somewhere around 75, although this still requires discussing.
 * Governor Amy Haas: What I am hearing in the current race is absolutely irresponsible and reckless with the lives of America's seniors. Raising the retirement age would deny Americans that have been paying into the system all their lives the benefits that they've been working towards for a very long time. We need to ensure that Social Security remains solvent going into the future and revitalize Social Security as it is to protect America's seniors and those approaching retirement age who are unsure of their own retirements.
 * What steps should the government take to make college more affordable?
 * Senator Ryder: All students who wish to apply for college loans must become a reservist to receive a loan for college to be repaid in Federal taxes over their lifetime.
 * Senator McCarthy: We should limit the amount that students have to pay for tuition for college.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): By making college free as seen in Denmark or Norway, perhaps funded by a capital gains tax.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-N): Many students land themselves in debt up until retirement age because they wanted a good education and opportunity for themselves. I believe that here in the states we should follow the lead of Scandinavia and make college free for students.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): If we analyze college affordability from an economic perspective, an interesting conclusion arises: as federal programs such as Pell grants increase, the price of college increases. Why is this? Supply remains constant as demand surges. To solve this problem, we need to use common economic sense and make federal programs contingent upon universities keeping tuition down for all students. We must also make student loans more affordable by getting political interests out of the way and allowing the free market to solve the problem.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: In this case, I think we should take a cue from the Scandinavian countries. To allow poor students the ability to go to college without picking the pockets of the many, we should make state college free or at least heavily reduced if students with parents under a certain income level score high enough on their SATs.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Colleges are a private institution. The government can help to make college affordable for some people, but it is up to the colleges themselves to make their services available to the masses. The only thing the government can do would be to encourage such institutions to lower their tuition fees. They can but they choose not too, and given that these are private bodies, they have that right. Higher education is not a right, but a privilege, one which the people must work hard to attain if they truly want it. If the people want affordable education, there is no shortage of public colleges they can go to if they want, but that is something that must be on the table, and for the majority of Americans, it is not. Having "Harvard" on your resume sounds a lot better rather than "University of Texas". It is the imagine people want, not the education.
 * Senator Cameron: The government should lower interest on student loans and offer more extensive income assistance.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: The government can provide incentives in order for private colleges to lower their costs. States can manage their state and community colleges as they think is best.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Education is a vital part of our modern society and we should never ignore it. It is therefore a pivotal part of our future, something we cannot and should not ignore. Students should be able to focus on contributing to society and becoming more successful, rather than how to pay off their debt. And if we don't help them out, they will never be able to do so. But I don't believe that we should go so far as considering some colleges a luxury. Princeton, Yale, MIT, Stanford, Harvard etc. are all great colleges, but there is no need to glorify them. The only thing that we should glorify, especially in these modern times, is the value of education. With new technology and better communications we can ensure any student can reach his full potential, practically everywhere. To conclude, yes we should make colleges affordable for the average American.
 * Governor Amy Haas: It is absolutely reprehensible that certain candidates believe that higher education is a privilege and not a right. In the highly competitive global economy that we live in, an educated workforce is an incredible investment--especially for our disillusioned youth. They deserve to have a president that is dedicated to allowing them to have a proper education without being burdened by a mountain of debt. We must allow students to refinance their student loan debts. We must ensure that public universities in this country charge little to no tuition so students can be encourage to go to college, rather than turning them off with the exorbitant rates that we are charging them at the moment. For those who have debt, we must allow them to refinance. For those who will incur debt in the future, we need to slash interest rates. Education is the cornerstone of every successful economy and must be invested in to reap the rewards. I am the only governor in this race that has implemented successful measures to lower the cost of tuition in the University of Virginia system, allowing many low-income communities to see their children go to college for the first time. Young people are the future. Let's invest in them.
 * Do you support the Common Core?
 * Senator Ryder: Yes
 * Senator McCarthy: As a moderate liberal, I certainly do. The Common Core provides a greater mental challenge for children to face, and in the long run it'll make our youth even smarter and more aware of the current situation our country is facing.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Yes.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): I agree with some degree of standardization in education but I believe that the current common core curriculum is not very effective. i support experimenting with charter schools to find better options for school curricula nationwide.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Yes, as it gives people all across the nation a fair and equal chance in life via education. However, we need to reform our curriculum to make it more effective. We need to continue ironing out the kinks as Common Core matures.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Common Core is vital to the American youth as it provides them with a single and comprehensive education throughout the country. The problem is that regionalism has been the bane of the system, with states and counties refusing to budge on what they consider an infringement upon their authority. The high levels of autonomy the federal government has provided them has divided the nation on something as simple as teaching the next generation of Americans. I agree there are many problems with the system, such as the debate over evolution and creationism, and if the government should allow for some room on that subject. Atheists and Christians will fight over that no doubt, but I wish to first get the groundwork laid down before moving on to those topics. For the time being, we must push ahead with this development, and not let it be held captive by the whims of regionalists.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As a student years ago, I was always interested when my class would get a new student, but one thing that seemed odd was that new students could be anywhere from a year ahead to a year behind our curriculum. The right of states to establish their own curriculum ought not be infringed by the federal government, but as a Governor I have endorsed the idea of coordinating all state curricula at the same high, internationally-competitive standards. As President, I will ensure that governors have the resources to tie curricula together without assigning a Washington bureaucrat to set a single national standard.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I think the Federal Government can set the standard and see if each state is reaching that standard, but I believe it should be up to the states as to how best to implement such standards.
 * Senator Cameron: I agree with the secretary of state and feel the federal government should have a standard and states work from there.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): As a person of high education, I see flaws in Common Core. To start off, I would like to say that as for the linguistic aspect of it, we do not focus much on the important parts of it. As a father of four, I am completely aware of the issues that this section contains. Personally I could talk about this for hours, but I will focus on the pivotal parts. Firstly, we need to teach them that making a mistake is alright, what's not alright is ridiculing someone for it or giving up because it doesn't work immediately. Moreover, we must be able to learn them how to learn. It's not about repeating the information they hear, it's about understanding the point of it and learning how to apply it. We must focus on the practical parts more. Furthermore, they need to be able to know how to think, how to criticize, comment, explain and debate. Eloquence is esteemed and everlasting and emerging in it is essential.
 * Governor Amy Haas: While Virginia has yet to implement Common Core standards, I do see certain cracks in the system. It might be beneficial for us to see the success (or failure) of Common Core in other states before I will be willing to sign it into law in Virginia.
 * Should the government allow the Death Penalty?
 * Senator Ryder: Yes.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Yes.
 * Senator McCarthy: I believe not. The death penalty costs us too much yearly, and is an unusually barbaric and cruel thing to do in 2016.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): No. It is cruel and unusual and thus unconstitutional. States with the death penalty have the highest crime rates, showing its total lack of deterrent impact, and death row is significantly more expensive than life imprisonment.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Hundreds if not thousands of innocent people have been sentenced to death and then exonerated afterward. This is unacceptable and on top of that the death penalty is very expensive, I believe everyone would benefit from its discontinuation.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: At this point in time, the death penalty is only around because some people want it to be around. It's hardly ever used and it costs more than it should. From a purely economic standpoint, we should discard the death penalty.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): Yes. The death penalty is best for ensuring that our worst criminals will never come back to harm us again.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Absolutely. We cannot allow criminals to leech off the government and the taxpayers simply because we find the death penalty "problematic". Those against such a system ought to remember what the crimes worthy of death are, and reconsider their position. Executions serve as a deterrent to those who would even consider such abhorrent acts deserving of death, and to remove this punishment would be to remove a solid deterrent many crimes.
 * Senator Cameron: The death penalty is very inefficient money-wise coupled with the fact that many innocent people have been on death row. The death penalty is not necessary.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Our Declaration of Independence enshrines the Lockean rights to life, liberty, and property. Whenever government infringes upon any of these rights, it has overstepped its boundaries, regardless of the reason. The death penalty is an example of government overstepping its boundaries and playing the role of God - the giver and taker-away of life. As Governor, I did not oversee a single death penalty sentence and as President, I will not oversee any federal application of the death sentence. That being said, I will not infringe upon the sovereign rights of the states to apply the death penalty for capital crimes, despite it being the least effective way to keep the populace safe.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: Yes, for extreme cases and in the face of undeniable evidence.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): He who is without sin may cast the first stone. Taking someone's life is God's decision and we should keep it that way. And more importantly, we should be focusing on rehabilitating our criminals. It's not about punishing them for their wrongdoings, it's about teaching them that they are wrong and why that is so. Good men needn't rules because they know why they exist in the first place.
 * Governor Amy Haas: We've seen time and time again that the death penalty is unwieldy and inefficient in its deterrence. It is incredibly expensive to keep someone on death row. I am also of the belief that God can only determine when we leave this Earth, not man. We cannot let the state play God. I am for maximum penalties for those committing the worst offenses, but not capital punishment.
 * To what extent do you support affirmative action?
 * Senator Ryder: None.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I have some support for it, as long as the competences of someone stay the primary focus.
 * Senator McCarthy: I believe that affirmative action is severely flawed. Instead of supporting and encouraging our minorities to engage in activities that would normally be stereotyped as nothing they could achieve, our major corporations purposely look out to employ people of color just to make them seem more racially diverse instead of hiring the most efficient person onto the job. This is an example of reverse discrimination, and it either needs to be outright abolished or significantly reformed.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): The structural obstacles to the success of minorities mean it is essential for an equitable nation.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Affirmative action is not perfect, but it allows millions of people of color in the United States to achieve higher education and gain the opportunities that they deserve to become successful.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Affirmative action is a distortion of the core American tenant of equality before the law. With my plans to discount state college for low-income students, affirmative action becomes a burden on the American government and will be, hopefully, phased out.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): Affirmative action is a terrible idea that only divides us more. Martin Luther King Jr. wished to live "in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Affirmative action is doing the exact opposite of what Dr. King wished for.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : I believe in a truly free-market economy for labor; that means the government shall not discriminate or engage in affirmative action. It also means that the government should not prohibit private actors from discrimination or the use of affirmative action. This free-market, laissez faire system is the best for employers and employees while ensuring that de jure racism remains stamped out of the American system forever.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I don't support it at all. Our republic was founded on the basis of merit and ability rather than outdated systems of race and bloodlines. Otherwise we will continue to slip into the system of hyphenated Americans that Theodore Roosevelt warned us about.
 * Senator Cameron: Affirmative Action is a distortion of equality and actually acts more a a form of discrimination. I do not support Affirmative Action.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): No. And let's just come out and say black people. Do we support helping black people get into places of business ad education. Mind you, I don't believe African Americans require the government's "help" getting into places they want to work. I didn't ask or receive any handouts from the government, and I worked to get to where I am today. There is nothing more patronizing than the government and society believing you are so incompetent that you need a "helping hand" getting up there with the white man. Further, I don't believe any company or school should be forced to accept black students and ignore qualified students simply because of their skin color. Merit should be the ultimate decider of one's fate in the world, not skin color.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Affirmative action may have been useful in the times when discrimination was a strong force in our society, but I hope and believe it is not anymore. By fixing other issues which I already discussed, such as education and other social issues, we would help minorities as well.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): I do not support affimitive action one bit. We should only allow students to get into college based off of grades, not sex, or race. In fact, you could even call affimitve action racist and sexist because it exculdes the hard workers for those who don't work as hard (just simply because of a person's race).
 * Governor Amy Haas: I support affirmative action. It's only been 50 years since the passage of the Civil Rights Act. We cannot pretend that this nation has always been friendly to ethnic minorities. To level the playing field, we must keep these policies in place. I am willing to debate my fellow candidates on the merits of these policies, which I will uphold as president.
 * Do you believe global warming exists? If so, what should the government do to stop it?
 * Senator Ryder: It exists but it is the fault of China and India largely and all we can do is make moderate investments in finding green technology to replace our current tech without creating inefficiencies.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Global Warming is just something made up to slow down our economy.
 * Senator McCarthy: Global warming is a huge problem in our nation, and we are the ones that primarily cause it. China and India certainly don't help the situation, but we're basically forced to deal with this ourselves as a nation. As such, we must adopt more green and environmentally-friendly energy sources and technology in order to halt global warming.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Yes, it is real, imminent and potentially devastating, and we need to end coal power production, increase subsidies for solar and wind power, and fund sustainable technologies such as electric cars. Strict emission targets should be enforced through a cap-and-trade system or carbon tax, and the United States should sign onto the Kyoto Protocol and endorse a 1.5 degrees target in global temperature rise.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Personally, I do not believe that global warming exists. Climate forecasters have been calling for a catastrophic increase in global temperatures for decades, but nonetheless their predictions were wrong. Also, if global warming exists, why is there a record amount of Arctic and Antarctic ice? This entire global warming idea has also called for regulation if C02 emissions, which are essential to factories in developing countries and businesses. The earth has also naturally warmed and cooled down during its history, and we are currently in a time period where it is warming up (heck, the last Ice Age was only 20,000 years ago). The public must be informed that countries and businesses are being crippled by regulations, and that the earth naturally warms and cools down over periods of time.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Climate change is one of the most pressing problems of our time. Our actions today dictate how we live mere decades from now. We must carry out legislation to reduce greenhouse emissions of our country. We must also place more government funding toward the research of renewable and clean energy sources. While it is easy to blame the problem of climate change on countries such as China and India we must understand that we are the world's second biggest greenhouse gas emitter and this must be changed.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: I believe global warming is the #1 problem that the world will face in the 21st century. Though it may not be completely apparent by now, the vast majority of scientists believe that it is happening, and the evidence backs them up. Many will argue that even if global warming does exist, we have more pressing problems as is. If so, will we have to wait until global warming has reared its ugly head and become a much larger dragon. What will we think then? No, we need to tackle the problem while it is still manageable. I propose a carbon tax and cap and trade laws to begin the transition to renewable energy, and subsidies towards renewable energy development.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Of course it exists. Those against the idea are either zealots or profiting from the event. I'm a devout Christian and believe quite strongly that global warming is real. Members of the faith may argue that God wouldn't allow global warming to happen, but it would be wise to note that God wouldn't have inspired the Apostle John to write the latter part of Revelations 11:18, which reads God would "...bring to ruin those ruining the earth." The earth is being ruined, and the Bible foretold that. So I have every reason to believe that global warming is very real and very dangerous. The government should punish corporations who knowingly disregard environment regulations, and push for the development of new sources of energy. Many like to point out the failure of Solindra, but fail to realize that the cost for the company and its ensuing bankruptcy came from Solindra needing to replace its solar cells with more efficient types to make solar power both affordable and a realistic alternative to coal and oil. Solar panels are expensive, and designing and replacing them even more so. Now expand that to an entire company and you see the problem and the $500 million dollar hole Solindra created. Research into alternative energies has to be both serious and effective. Alternative energy is nice on paper, but must be affordable and realistic in practice to be effective, and I believe the government can help with that transition.
 * Senator Cameron: Global Warming is a serious threat. It is clearly seen by the unprecedented weather and more extreme seasons. Our future generations will have to deal with cities disappearing. We must begin incentives for alternative energy as well as fines for corporations that pollute the environment. We must also help protect species on the verge of extinction
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): I am no scientist, and honestly the evidence on climate change can be made to point in either direction. As a policy-maker, however, there are a few key takeaways from talk of global warming. The first is the need for a vibrant energy sector. As a supporter of all-of-the-above energy policy, that means enabling companies to look into green energy as well as opening up our substantial natural resource reserves. I am also opposed to heavy regulation of our economy to save the environment; it is in economically-advanced regions such as the United States and Europe where the environment is cleanest, compared to developing nations like India and China.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe if exists. I think that the government doesn't need to take too aggressive a stance on this, as it seems like some corporations like Tesla and others are on their way to easing this problem. By taking grants from failing companies and applying them to competent ones, we can ease this problem without expanding the government significantly. I would also support the re-establishment of a neutral science advisory board for Congress for scientific issues such as these, as Congress can't afford to be left in the dark regarding science.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Facts, unlike butter, are not something you can replace with nobody noticing. We must take action, not for us, but for our children and our children's children. We need to start by thinking more environmentally and gradually starting to be more at peace with nature. And each of us can help out. Even the biggest waterfalls are made of small drops.
 * Governor Amy Haas: Climate change is the defining issue on global scale. Without action, the future that our kids and grandkids are looking at is a grim one. Climate change comes with devastating effects to sea level, global food supply, and our wellbeing as a species. There is no denying the science. This is real and it's happening now. I am not a scientist, but I know our scientists do a great job--I believe them. Despite the grim forecasts, there is definitely hope for the future. As president, I will make it a top priority to forge an international climate treaty to curb and ultimately work towards eliminating CO2 emissions. China has been playing ball, which is a sign of great hope. We must find ways to aid the development of underdeveloped nations all while respecting the environment. I will increase solar energy tax credits and heavily invest in wind power, amongst other forms of renewable energy. It is our responsibility to mitigate and possibly reverse the effects of climate change. It is within our reach and it must be done so all future generations inherit an Earth that is habitable.

Economic Issues

 * What is your tax plan (one of the most important questions)?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I plan to increase taxes on the upper class, and also slightly increase taxes for the upper middle class as well. I will use this extra money in our budget to fund other significant programs, such as education and better health care for our citizens.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Americans have the right to use their money like they want. The taxes are already to high, and I plan on cutting them as soon as I'll arrive in office.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): All Americans should be allowed the right to use their own money without the government reaching into their pocket to take it away. Most of us are extremely frustrated by the IRS, which is an arduous program that steals any hardworking American's money. I will work at completely removing the IRS from our tax structure, as well as extending tax cuts to all classes.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Capitalism does not self-correct towards greater equality - instead, wealth has a snowballing effect, triggering massive economic inequalities. The wealthiest 0.1% are worth more than the bottom 90% today in the United States because of a corrupt political system which advantages the wealthy and allows them to impose self-interested laissez-faire, anti-union policies on the rest of society. To fix this, we need to remove deductions on taxes on capital gains, add additional taxes on high consumption and consumption of luxury goods, and raise taxes on very high earners, which will enable us to fund an improved social safety net, better schools and free college to restore true equality of opportunity.
 * Senator Ryder: Those who work hard should not be punished. I will make taxes more fair on the middle and upper class as well lower them across the board.
 * Senator Cameron: As senator Afewerek had said the top 0.1% had more income than the bottom 90%. This is unacceptable. Under my plan I would raise the tax rate of the top 0.1 percent to 45%. The upper middle class may also see a small increase in taxes. I would also stop the IRS from taking advantage of those with different political beliefs.
 * Abdallah Salem: Not only are the top 1% worth more than the bottom 90%, our infrastructure is in total disrepair, we must increase taxes on those who make more than 200,000 USD yearly to 40% in order to fund welfare and healthcare. I shall, however, not increase taxes on any other socioeconomic class.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Does it seem lawful for the government to take your worked earnings? Ladies and gentlemen, let's pretend that we're criminals on a highway, robbing them for cash. Would it seem ethical to take money against somebody's wishes? Would it make the person any more better if they were an IRS agent? Ladies and Gentlemen, I am here to help stop those robbers from stealing your hard worked cash. What I propose is this; A fifteen percent tax cut all around, so investors can feel more confident in investing in new businesses and buildings to create more jobs. It's happened before (See Reaganomics), and has had major success. If I'm given the Libertarian nomination, I will fight big government to let you what you want with your tax money, and to strengthen the economy for the United States of America. TL;DR - Less taxes equals more available cash, which equals a less poor lower class and middle class. The rich can invest in more businesses and create more jobs, strengthening our economy.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH): If an individual demanded up to half of your income or else you'd be thrown into a cage, we would call it theft. If a government does the same thing, why do we call it taxation? Taxation is, at best, a necessary evil in the current American system of government, but it doesn't have to be. Our Founders maintained the Union without income taxes, and ultimately this is where we should return. As President, I will reduce the tax burden upon all Americans, starting by simplifying and eliminating wasteful deductions and reducing nominal bracket rates. Over time, we will work down to a flat 10% income tax collected by the states - as my father used to say, "10% is good enough for God, it ought to be good enough for government." Removing the IRS and the 75,000 page tax code will save Americans 6 billion hours per year; letting them keep billions of dollars of their own money will do more to stimulate the sustainable growth of our economy than any previous government stimulus in the history of the world. My tax plan will have an immeasurable  economic impact will restore America's place as the beacon of opportunity around the globe.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: We are in a period of growth and recovery, but that recovery is fragile and is dependent on several volatile market forces. As such, it would be prudent to reduce taxes on the low and middle class and small businesses, the economic bedrock that our economy rest upon. Corporations would also see lower taxes to a lesser degree, and all of this would help the people and enable businesses to grow by hiring and investing. I would also seek to close loopholes as well as clean up any inefficiencies and crack down on corruption. I would also not allow the IRS to target any organization for their political beliefs as the previous administration did.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): I believe that modest reforms to the tax code are needed. Mind you, I'm not campaigning on the "tax rich man more uga-uga", because the wealthy are taxed enough. What most Americans don't realize is that our tax system is stacked. Say for instance you make $10,000 dollars, and another man $20,000 dollars. Your tax rate would be one percent, and the other man's two percent. However, the other man would pass the $20,000 threshold, and therefore pays two percent as his base tax, plus the one percent tax from his previous income rate. So he comes out paying 3% in taxes. The same applies to the wealthy today. They pay the base tax rate for their income, plus every other tax rate beneath that. So they are paying less than the poor, but more than the poor. Now imagine you make it to that income level. Would it be fair to tax you more because you make more, even though you are already paying more? It's easy to sit and the bottom and demand that people's things be taken from them because they have more. We have a word for that, and it's called communism. I prefer a simple tax rate not unlike the one we have, with common sense exemptions and benefits. We don't need to change the system that works for the people who don't.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: We need to fight the unholy trinity of government, big business, and special interest groups that are all in each other's bed at the expense of the everyday American. To do this, I will lower taxes across the board, with the exception of an inheritance tax, which I will raise on the wealthy. Old money causes powerful dynasties to buy their way into the unholy pie, allowing them to remain afloat on nothing more than money that their ancestors made. However, we also need to cut the excesses of the government. Our tax code is long-winded and outdated, and it is time for us to redo it to make taxes understandable to the average American, so you are not kept in the dark while your pockets are picked.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): It's hard to say something new and interesting when my co-candidates already have so many ideas. Personally I agree with the raising of the inheritance tax. Because the top 1%, as my fellow candidates call them do not get so much of their money through sheer income. There are other factors to count in, and this is why we must raise the inheritance tax. As for lowering the taxes, I do not see it happening during my potential presidency, perhaps only for the lower socioeconomic classes. Taxes benefit the people and give them the opportunity to live a healthier and safer life.
 * Governor Amy Haas: I believe in a fair tax system for all. Progressive taxation is the way to ensure that everyone pays their fair (and proportionate) share. The sheer inequality that is perpetuated by the broken and convoluted system we have now is growing at an alarming rate. The top 1% in this country are worth much more than the bottom 90% and their wealth seems to grow more every day. As president, I will increase taxes on the richest Americans and make sure that the middle class isn't burdened by more taxes. I have replicated this plan in Virginia, with the wealthy paying their fair share and--as a result--we've seen a budget surplus in the last fiscal year. My tax plan is responsible and fair. Flat taxes are irresponsible and promise a massive budget shortage if put into place.
 * What do you plan to do about the growing debt?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): All we have to do in order to fix this debt is properly control our budget. If we can raise the income tax and provide greater protection for the fragile real estate business that caused us to plunge into a recession just almost a decade ago, I believe we can certainly keep this economy afloat.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): The debt is mainly due to the large among of expanses from the Walker Administration. Cuts in governments programs that are useless will be needed to deal with the debt.
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): The first thing we need to do to lower our debt is to privatize programs that we provide, such as Amtrak or Medicare and Medicaid. The next thing we need to do is stop spending our money on anything that serves no purpose.
 * Senator Ryder: While we need to balance the budget as soon as we can don't worry we are America. What are they going to do repossess.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): Our budget is entirely disproportionate, we spend more o the military than any other government institution combined. We spend more money waging wars than building houses houses for this nation's homeless, we spend more money on the army than making sure our children have the education and opportunity they deserve, we spend more money getting our veterans injured than healing them. It's time to wake up and fix this, we need to make our budget work for our country.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : It is time to wake up, America: the federal government has an uncontrollable spending problem. It is the ultimate shopaholic! As President, I will tackle our national debt head-on by vetoing any unbalanced budget and ensuring the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment and a Line-Item Veto Amendment to the Constitution. Next, we will need to reform our unfunded liabilities, such a Medicaid and Social Security. Then comes the trimming of government bureaucracy and ensuring that whatever civil service remains serves to help the everyday American, not connected special interest groups. This will takes cuts from all government programs: the Democrat and Republican silent agreement to pour billions into the welfare/warfare state will be put to an end under my Presidency. Balancing our budget and putting us on a path towards a debt-free future is the best inheritance we can leave our children, and I intend to do so as President of the United States.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I think the debt is too large to be defeated under one president. However, there are several steps we can take to limit its growth. I would ask Congress to ensure that its budgets are balanced and any tax surpluses can go towards paying off such debt. I would also be favorable to a small fund dedicated towards paying off domestic holders of the debt to help reduce it.
 * Senator Cameron: The debt is far too large to be defeated by one or even two presidents. However, we can work our way to lowering the debt. One way is to effectively control our budget. Under my plan we would cut military spending and lower the department of education's budget. Under my plan the dept. of education would only set a standard for states. Also we should begin to lower our foreign aid.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): What I propose we do to fight the national debt is to do the following things; slash the balance of a Social Security check by five-hundred dollars, using the increased amount of money from my tax plan to be paid off to the debt, and to decrease military spending by a fourth to rest the entire fate of the debt on trickle down economics.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): Very simple. Stop spending on things we don't need. Cutting military spending, slash foreign aid to nations that don't need it such as Israel and South Korea, focus on reeling in interest rates on the dollar, and tighten our belts where needed. Rebuild the infrastructure to produce jobs and increase economic growth, thereby gaining more tax receipts to use in paying off our debt. We can fix our debt if we stop spending like we have a credit card. We don't. We have cash, and that cash is limited. If we learn to regulate ourselves financially, then we can profit in this time increasing debt and foolish behavior.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Simple. More money in, less money spent. For starters, the bureaucracy of the United States is incredibly bloated. We need to cut down on ineffectual government programs and unnecessary middlemen found within our nation. Second, we need to stop cozying up with the private sector, especially the big banks and the real estate market. Like a father, the government must know when to let its children make their own decisions and not run back to it to bail them out. As Milton Friedman said, "The government ought to be a referee, not a team player". Thirdly, we need to pass laws that are for the good of the nation as a whole, not the special interest groups who are merely using politicians. The only way to accomplish this is by voting for someone (hello!) who is not bought off and owes no favors to anyone. It will be hard, as the system is concerned, first and foremost, with preserving itself, but by voting for me and not someone who sounds like he has a stick up his ass, we will be able to actually balance the budget.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): First and foremost, as every capitalist ought to know, you need to spend money to gain money. But it's important to know how and where to spend it. We need to increase the purchasing power of the average American. That we can only do by assuring that every American lives a safe free and healthy life. My plan to decrease the debt is directly connected to my other policies, however we will have to slowly restructure the administration in order to cut off the redundant parts of it.
 * Governor Amy Haas: Our debt is out of control. We have a huge deficit and our government is hemorrhaging money. We must stick to my progressive taxation plan and implement an off-shore profits tax on corporations that evade taxes by moving abroad to reduce the deficit and create surpluses that we can then use to service our debt better. We must move forward and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure with a spending bill that revitalizes America, and stimulates the economy by creating thousands--possibly thousands--of jobs.
 * What do you plan to do about Social Security?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): Social Security is something we shouldn't necessarily touch until we can properly manage our budget. Once that happens, then we can fix Social Security so more of our lower class elderly citizens can afford to live in peace and prosperity without worrying about their next meal or place to sleep.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I believe that we should reduce Social Security. If not, we'll end up just like Canada, where some peoples literally live out of Social Security for years! We need to stimulate the economy, not slow it!
 * Senator Champion (R-PA): When I'm president, I will establish a "cut-off" on Social Security that will make it obsolete in several decades. This cut-off will make Social Security not mandatory for those born on and after a certain year. While this will not completely end Social Security, this will mark the beginning of the end of a program that could suck us down into billions of dollars of spending.
 * Senator Ryder: I will make it so that when you go onto Social Security you still have to work part time until you are declared medically unfit for work.
 * Senator Cameron: As my colleague Senator McCarthy said Social Security should not be drastically changed until we can effectively manage our budget.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As President, Social Security reform will be a top priority. The federal government should not be running a giant Ponzi scheme and force future generations to pay of present day largesse. This mafiaso experiment must be curtailed before it becomes unbearable under the strain of the Baby Boomer Generation. My plan is a simple way to phase out Social Security. No current beneficiaries will be impacted unless they choose to leave the system. Those under 65 will then have all of their money invested into Social Security plus interest returned as soon as possible. Then, to provide for their retirement, we will create a number of tax-free savings accounts for people of any socioeconomic background. Finally, a slim safety net will remain for those who outlive their adequate retirement savings in the form of an insurance program. Social Security has always been a broken promise
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I think we need to take a hard look at Social Security to see how it has benefited us and how it has slowed us down. I think we need to ensure that no one relies on Social Security alone and we must not allow any free riders. I will examine various steps towards this issue and I will consider raising the retirement age, given the times we now live in.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Social security was created when the average lifespan was shorter. In 1935, the average lifespan for a male was roughly sixty years long. It wasn't meant to be used the way it is now. I propose we cut the program, that money to let YOU save up for retirement with YOUR earned money. Less taxes = more income to American households = More money for retirement.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): We take money from the elderly's wages and derive taxes from that, we return when they are older than 65 and as fraction of what was taken to them, we need to derive taxes from the top 1% of the country that hide their money overseas rather than take it from those who can't live without it.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Social Security is another once-alturistic program that has been converted into a thinly-veiled money making machine for the aforementioned "unholy trinity". We need to cut down on Social Security and slowly wean ourselves off it over the next few decades to prevent the fund from running into trouble.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Social Security is a good concept but it needs to be updated. I think we need to start off by increasing the retirement age to 70 for now. We also need to focus more on children's benefits, as they are our future. Because, logically, if the young are capable we need to spend less on the old and frail. There is also the need to aid the disabled more. Many of them, after all, are still able to contribute to society.
 * Governor Amy Haas: We need to ensure the solvency of Social Security to make sure that we are not cheating our seniors and those who are approaching retirement age. We cannot raise the retirement age. We must find other ways to make sure SS is solvent. We must increase the cap on taxable income to ensure that people properly pay into the social security system and to increase money flow into the SS coffers. By expanding Social Security like this, we can make sure that retirement isn't something America's seniors dread. If we implement a fair system, we can make Social Security solvent for generations to come
 * Do you think that the large banks in the US should be broken up?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I certainly believe so. These major banking corporations are choking out smaller banking companies and abusing capitalism, so I think we must establish more anti-trust laws that protect these small businesses from instantly failing.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Although I believed we had some thrust issues with them in the recent years, I do believe that the Banks o America are one of the pillars of our economy" We just need to made sure to put in place programs to help them in case of needs, so that no major crisis could come out of it.
 * Senator Ryder: I will never break the large banks up. Place some reasonable regulations and have money ready to avoid them collapsing yes but I will not break them up.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I will refuse to consider breaking the big banks up without detailed analysis of what ramifications may occur should it be done.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : I believe that the biggest bank in the US should be broken up - the Federal Reserve. The negative effects that the Fed has on our currency are immense; all major economic downturns since 1913 can be directly traced to the Fed. The problem with the big banks aren't the banks themselves, per se. Rather it is the Federal Reserve that is comprised of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who respond to special interests and hurt the interests of poor and middle class Americans. As President, it will be my privilege to end the Fed, ending America's chronic banking crises once and for all!
 * Senator Cameron: Banks hurt small businesses, the root of America's economy. Under my plan we would establish a new set of antitrust laws to help America's small businesses.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): No bank is too big to fail; any bank that significant will be broken up under my administration. As President, I would reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, define banking to force banks out of risky market sectors, separating traditional banks from hedge funds, and forcibly break up any bank whose insolvency would cause serious economic issues.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): The only band that I see needs to be broken up is the Federal Reserve. When the Fed was created into power on Christmas Eve 1913, it put the hands of Americas wealth into the hands of a few. I say, as my first act of the Jones administration would be to denounce the Federal Reserve, and to call to end the Fed.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): The problem isn't simply banks, it's banks and trusts. If I win the election I can assure you, I would put anti-trust laws forward and reinstate the banking act of 1933.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: The banks can break themselves up if they wish! Our current "too big to fail" banks are a creation of an agreement between the government and the banks that cozied up to it. The reason banks give out so many risky loans is because the government bails them out every time they get in trouble because of it. If the government stopped doing this, the banks would be forced to adopt smarter lending practices. It's time to treat the banks of the US like adults.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): The banks are too big, indeed, and we must provide a market where there is no monopoly in order to help strenghten the economy. Centralization of power and wealth is the best solution in a democratic society. If the big banks do break apart under new regulations that w
 * Governor Amy Haas: The banks are too big and I am for breaking them up. They have become too-big-too-fail and endanger our economy. We've seen that these banks are capable of wrecking our economy, as they did 8 years ago. We must resurrect Glass-Steagall to separate investment and commercial banking in order to create a fairer system.
 * If the government required you to cut funding to some government programs, what would you cut?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I would possibly cut the Common Core and a few other education programs. The youth of America is important, but we must establish at least basic healthcare and Social Security to our older citizens.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): We must cut in the healthcare and all those programs. Americans should be able to protect themselves without the government telling them to do it.
 * Senator Ryder: I will cut government funded healthcare and welfare as well as a gradual decrease on the Social Security.
 * Senator Cameron: I would cut military spending as well as the education department. I would examine each department to determine which needs its budget and which does not.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : I favor an all-of-the-above spending cut strategy by targeting the least productive arms of major government bureaucracies. Defense contractors spend hundreds of dollars for a single nail. Millions of dollars are spent "rescuing" an already abundant supply of salmon. As a former management consultant, I understand which operations are effective and which are downright destructive, and I intend to restructure our government to focus on the people, not the special interests. Ultimately, I would consolidate and eliminate the departments of Commerce, Education, Energy, Interior, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, and Transportation, retaining only key functions.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I would cut from the Department of Education, as under my administration the Department of Education would only be responsible for setting a standard and seeing if those standards are set. I will also examine all departments and see what funding is occurring that is not needed, and cut that if needed.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): If I needed to cut government programs, I would almost cut all of them. Here's why; should you need to pay for other things that you wouldn't want to pay for? For example, does a pro-life Christian support funding of Planned Parenthood's abortion services? No. Does a Pacifist like that the military is one of our largest spent thing on GDP? No. Now, granite, some things would need to stay, but under less funding (I.e, Military, Social Security, etc.). Now, since that is impossible and wouldn't even get past the bill creation stage, I would propose cutting common core math, a fraction of the military, and some of social security. It's what we need to get America running again.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): The military, it receives 55% of our federal budget, we spend more on the military than the next 10 countries combined, they don't need to pour all the money into defense, why do we?
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): The military primarily. We have created a military that focuses more on size than efficiency. Yes, we are and will be the defenders of the free world, but we don't need to spend so much money on doing that. Strike hard and strike fast is the way to go.
 * Governor Amy Haas: Under a Haas administration, we would not need to cut anything--especially if my fair taxation system is passed. If we do have to cut something, I would be for cutting military spending. We lead the world in military power. Our power is unrivaled. That is why I believe our military does not need to spend as much as the rest of the world combined. A responsible military spending program should be implemented.
 * What should the federal minimum wage be?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We should raise it from $7.25 to a solid $9.00, which is enough to support at least a low-income family for a fair while.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): The minimum wage should be able to support the Americans and help them to live their life to their fullest.
 * Senator Ryder: I will keep it the same. The current regulation ensures no slave labour but good margins for companies.
 * Senator Cameron: I believe minimum age should be adjusted by age group with it being higher for older people.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): It is impossible to live on $7.35 or even $9 an hour. We need a $15 minimum wage nationally, and that's what I will put in place if elected President, combined with restrictions on businesses to prevent them dodging paying it.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): The Federal minimum wage should be kept the same. Simply put, if the minimum wage is increased, companies would then have to lay off workers because they would become such a huge expense for them. Plus, this shouldn't be a major worry; my tax plan should allow investors to create jobs in poorer neighborhoods because they would to be able to create jobs to help people live. Plus, with my tax cuts, the people would have less of a burden to worry about when trying to live.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I will consider a small increase in the minimum wage. However, I think we need to set a clear distinction between those on the minimum wage for living expenses and those young people in school who do not need higher wages to survive.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : $7.25 in New York City buys substantially less than $7.25 in Cheyenne, Wyoming. This scenario plays out across the United States, and even has devastating implications for the territory of Puerto Rico. Our Founding Fathers knew best when they reserved wage-setting powers to the states via the Tenth Amendment. As President, I will allow states to opt out of federal minimum wage regulations. This will have the added benefit of boosting employment and ultimately making our nation - and each citizen - wealthier.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): The Federal minimum wage should be kept the same. Simply put, if the minimum wage is increased, companies would then have to lay off workers because they would become such a huge expense for them. Plus, this shouldn't be a major worry; my tax plan should allow investors to create jobs in poorer neighborhoods because they would to be able to create jobs to help people live. Plus, with my tax cuts, the people would have less of a burden to worry about when trying to live.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): This is something that I have much experience in. I grew up in a family where my mother and father, and even me worked full time jobs for three-to-five dollars per hour. We barely managed to afford living in a government housing project. I am a staunch supporter of a $15 minimum wage, because people deserve to live, not just survive.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: I would keep a token federal minimum wage in place to prevent completely exploitative business practices, but I would never consider raising it, as it is counter-intuitive and would disproportionately affect small businesses and workers in the service industry, as small businesses would have to close and both small and large businesses would have to lay off the same workers that a higher minimum wage is trying to help protect.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): The federal minimum wage should be $15 one day. But not witihin the next term, regardless of who does it. I support a steady growth of the minimum wage throughout my potential term in order to lower the shock value that it could have on the economy. Change is an essential part of life, but it's best if we keep it at a steady pace.
 * Governor Amy Haas: In Virginia, we've implemented a $12 minimum wage that has worked well. As the economy grows and inflation increases prices, we should raise the minimum wage to keep up with these economic conditions. I recognize that the United States is a large country with vastly differing economic conditions, which is why I favor a $12 minimum wage as a federal baseline. States can choose to raise it depending on the cost of living. As president, I will make sure that the minimum wage is raised whenever the conditions necessitate it.
 * How do you plan to lower the unemployment rate, and help those currently unemployed?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I plan to lower it by increasing the minimum wage so jobs can be more attractive to unemployed citizens, and I believe we must slightly decrease the amount of welfare our unemployed citizens receive in order to encourage them to look for jobs in the market.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): First, we must make sure that our jobs are not steal by illegal immigrants. Then, we need to help the corporations and enterprises in their attempt to stimulate economy and create new jobs all over America.
 * Senator Ryder: It is not the government's job to help you get a job. We must provide a low tax and good trading environment conductive to business growth and an education which teaches you how to work.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Decreasing the tax rate on the rich allows them to invest in more factories and buildings that create jobs and businesses. As I said in my tax reform. If we cut taxes enough, taxpayers would be able to more confidently able to invest knowing that they have more money to fall back onto if something goes wrong. It's happened before, and it needs to happen again.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: As in my plan, lower taxes will allow people to breath easier and businesses to grow by investing and hiring new workers. This will reduce unemployment nationwide.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Underemployment and chronic unemployment are two cancers in the American economy. My jobs plan, supported by the economic growth fueled by my tax plan, will increase meaningful employment opportunities. Currently, a record low percentage of Americans are working full-time; if we achieved previous levels of employment our GDP would be greater by $4 trillion, or $13,000 per American. My jobs plan will be based upon providing incentives to hire unemployed individuals (such as tax holidays) and incentives to become employed (such as relocation loans and temporary income support). Taken together, these supply-side and demand-side reforms will defeat the metastasized cancers of unemployment.
 * Senator Cameron: Under my plan we would help small businesses, the root of America's economy. We should also consider unveiling education programs to help the unemployed. We would also improve America's infrastructure creating thousands of jobs. We would also increase the minimum wgae by age group making jobs more attractive. Also incentives to become employed will be enacted.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): American manufacturing jobs are vanishing to China, which then sells our stolen market share back to us subsidized by its slave labour laws. I would place tariffs on goods coming from foreign countries to ensure American manufacturing jobs stay in America. Second, the fall in union membership and deregulation of businesses driven by the wide availability of immigrant labour is driving down wages. I would make it easier for workers to join unions, expand public sector unions, and provide a path to legal citizenship for immigrants so they can mov into the legitimate labour market and stop undercutting American workers' wages. Finally, the infrastructure expansion I propose, such as a national high-speed rail network, would provide thousands of jobs.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Decreasing the tax rate on the rich allows them to invest in more factories and buildings that create jobs and busiesnesses. As I said in my tax reform. If we cut taxes enough, taxpayers would be able to more confidently able to invest knowing that they have more money to fall back onto if something goes wrong. It's happened before, and it needs to happen again.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): The best way to decrease employment is get rid of outsourcing. It's much cheaper for a large corporation to have a factory full of six-year old children in the Congo and China than to have it under regulation here. We can't have that. Tariffs must be put in place on outsourced products to keep them from being bought as widely and keep our jobs at home.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Quite simple actually, the educational reforms will help out the future teachers of America for example. We need to help those currently unemployed by making it easier to find a job which I plan to achieve by enacting reforms that bring the factories back to the United States. Moreover, by working on enviromentally friendly infrastructure around and inside cities we could make it easier for the blue-collar workers of America to travel to their workplace destination as well as lowering greenhouse gas emission.
 * Governor Amy Haas: My government would lower the unemployment rate by lessening the burden on the middle class and small businesses--which are the real job creators. This will stimulate job creation and ultimately help the economy. My infrastructure bill will also create thousands of jobs. As jobs are created and wages rise, the economy will grow and the unemployment rate will plummet.
 * Do you believe labor unions help or hurt the economy?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): Labor unions help maintain our workers great pay, defend their rights in the workplace, and various other righteous things. They certainly are great organizations.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): When they were created, they did help America to get where it is now. But I think that today's Unions are just slowing economy and making life more difficult for both employers and workers.
 * Senator Ryder: I will remove unions because they damage our economy and are counter-productive.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Labor unions create a serious problem to the manufacturer. For example, let's say a recently graduated student (We'll call him Richard) from a state university applies to join a teachers union. Richard was a hard partier, and not much of a serious student actually in school. He applies and gets a job at a high school. Now, the next year, another student graduated (We'll call him Bill) from the same school. Now, Bill, a very hard worker and person, applies to get a job at the same high school as Richard. The staff, knowing that Richard is an incompetent teacher, is unable to be fired for the better and more prepared student, Bill. So, unions are a big problem for our society, because they allow the incompetent to stay and the prepared not.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe Unions were helpful for establishing fair work in safe conditions earlier in our country's history but now I believe they are obstructing an individual's right to work by forcing them to join a union and pay dues to a cause they may not support. This will no longer happen in a Whitmore administration.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As a Libertarian, I support the precept of voluntary association. The problem when assessing unions is that they can easily violate voluntary association while hiding behind its shadow. If an individual must join a union to find employment, then voluntary association is clearly violated. At the same time, Gilded Age restrictions upon union membership are also inherently immoral. The ideal balance is struck with right-to-work legislation, which I will aim to enact as President.
 * Senator Cameron: Labor Unions help workers maintain livable wages, workplace rights and various other important things. This helps America as a whole.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Labor unions create a serious problem to the manufacturer. For example, let's say a recently graduated student (We'll call him Richard) from a state university applies to join a teachers union. Richard was a hard partier, and not much of a serious student actually in school. He applies and gets a job at a high school. Now, the next year, another student graduated (We'll call him Bill) from the same school. Now, Bill, a very hard worker and person, applies to get a job at the same high school as Richard. The staff, knowing that Richard is an incompetent teacher, is unable to be fired for the better and more prepared student, Bill. So, unions are a big problem for our society, because they allow the incompetent to stay and the prepared not.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): This question is almost a joke. Labor unions allow people to be treated fairly when oppressed by their employers, it allows them to speak out for fair labor conditions. We should follow suit of NYC an other cities in the USA that have banned companies such as Walmart that don't provide a labor union for their workers.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Labor unions are an essential part of our capitalist society as they are the first to react when capitalism goes wrong. We need to put more effort in connecting with them in order to ensure a fair and tranquil workplace enviroment.
 * Should the government continue to subsidize farmers?
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): Farmers provide a majority of our daily resources, of course I do.
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): We should found our farmers, as it help us protect our market against foreign influence.
 * Senator Ryder: I will ensure that cheap foreign food is not overtaking our own food and I will ensure good conditions but I will not provide funding to farmers.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: Yes.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As President, I would closely scrutinize our current subsidy policy to enhance its effectiveness and determine its viability. As they currently exist, subsidies go primarily to multi-millionaire farmers who overproduce their crops to drive small family farms out of the business, while increasing the price of the crop for consumers. Any student who has taken Economics 101 understands that subsidies are detrimental to family farmers, consumers, and taxpayers. Its time to reform our subsidy system to ensure maximal efficacy.
 * Senator Cameron: We should continue to subsidize farmers. However, if budget cuts are in order we will closely examine the subsidy policy.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): It is not the government's job to pay people to do what they want with their land. Though we can encourage Americans to grow crops, we shouldn't reward them for their own choice. Plus, it would only create another tax that would be unpopular among the American public.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): The removal of subsidies would leave us dependent on foreign food imports and hike food prices for working families. I wholeheartedly support them - yet at the same time, we cannot keep subsidize megafarms which damage the environment and drive family farmers out of business. I would cut subsidies for agribusinesses, who have no need for them, while maintaining them for family farms.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: While I support protecting American farms, our current subsidy laws are completely counter-intuitive. Most American subsidies go to corn or soybean farmers who provide the base of the junk food system that the working poor are forced to rely more and more upon as smaller farms of "specialty" crops are forced to go out of business. It is both sad and ironic that most of the people considered "food insecure" in America are the rural poor who produce the vast majority of our food. It's time to bring back competition by heavily cutting subsidies on corn and soy, partially replacing them with a subsidy on weather insurance plans to minimize the risks of solely growing specialty crops.
 * Governor Anthony Xavier Mitchell (D-MA): Farming is often neglected in today's society, which is why we need to subsidize farmers, but it needs to be done in such a way that it focuses on allowing them to buy new technology instead of just giving them money. We need to give them what they need, and they will then most definitely work efficiently.
 * Do you support deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I totally support the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as it is a great way to get closer with our partners in Asia.
 * Senator Ryder: I do not support it as it loosens our ability to control our own markets but I agree to it in a reduced form.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): The Trans-Pacific Partnership is one of the greatest ways that we can amend our relationships with our partners in Asia, so I certainly support it.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: Yes.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : I am an ardent supporter of free trade and would be happy to see the nations encompassing the TPP join together for mutual free trade. I am not, however, supportive of the trade and labor regulations that comprise "fair" trade. A truly free trade agreement would involve the removal of quotas and tariffs, but I'm afraid that too often treaties like the TPP or TTIP are watered down to include too many unbearable political concessions. As President, I will negotiate trade deals that benefit American consumers and companies without weakening our sovereignty.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): I most certainly do not support the TPP. It allows the outsourcing and environmental damage that hurt our economy and future generations. The TPP might seem like a good idea at first. But it only helps large corporations and not the majority of Americans.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): free trade I support. I think we should allow trade like this to flourish. However, some of the tariffs we have on are increasing the prices of imported goods, and that should be removed. I'd say this deal was okay, but still has a few issues with it.
 * Senator Cameron: The main issue the the TPP is that American workers will be outsourced to Asia hurting our economy. However in a reduced form, I might support it.
 * How can the US achieve energy independence?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I believe that we must still continue to help the petrol industries, but that we must also seek for new sources of energy in a close future.
 * Senator Ryder: As the most advanced nation on the earth we should use the most advanced power source which is nuclear. I will ensure money is allocated to the construction of these plants.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We must cut some of our support of the petrol industries and we must institute greater restrictions on what types of energy can be used on our highways. It's virtually the only way we'll be able to convince these petrol industries that we are certainly serious on our mission to end global warming and achieve complete energy independence.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe we may already be independent. We are one of the largest oil producers in the world and one of the leaders in green energy technology. However, oil is largely volatile and its price and availability vary. I would support nuclear reactors as a means of ensuring such independence in the further future.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The United States is blessed with an abundant supply of natural resources with which we could easily pursue energy independence; it is imperative to our national security that we do so. We must embrace an "all-of-the-above" strategy, relying on oil, coal, natural gas alongside new technologies like hydroelectric, nuclear, geothermal, wind, and solar power.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): We would need to encourage investors to create drill out at sea and strive to create more power plants. Once the wealthy have helped create power plants, electricity bills could potentially lower, leading to more jobs and wealth.
 * Senator Cameron: We can achieve energy independence by providing incentives for alternative energy. This could provide us with a new clean source of energy that we don't have to import.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): We have our own oil, let's use it. We must also fund research of clean fuels that run on corn and other bio-fuels.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: We need to cut tax breaks for fossil fuel companies and raise a tax on fossil fuels while instituting a nationwide cap and trade plan to prevent people from paying the price (both financial and physical) of climate change down the road. In addition, we need to incentivise research on renewable energy so those sectors will grow and employ more people.
 * What do you plan to change about the current healthcare system?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): We can all see that the current healthcare system is not working. If I am elected to office, I will change it to make it more profitable for all America.
 * Senator Ryder: I will modify the system so that those who are not paying in will not receive out and loosen the load.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): What President Walker has done with the Affordable Care Act is outstanding in my opinion. While the system isn't necessarily perfect in any sense of the word, it certainly is a lot more stable and effective than any other healthcare system we've adopted in the past. I will try to add on and certainly modify the Act so that even more of our impoverished citizens can be qualified at least under basic healthcare insurance and coverage.
 * Senator Cameron: President Walker's Affordable Care act is a great step for America as a whole. under my healthcare plan we would modify the Affordable Care Act and possibly work our way to a single payer system similar to England.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): I would implement single-payer health care, saving middle-class families money by cutting out absurdly high insurance premiums. This is essential and would be one of the main policies of my administration.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe this health care act is similar to the union problem. If individuals chose to go without health insurance, then they should be free to do so. I also believe the government should stick to its promise of allowing people to remain with their current provider if they choose to. Government should work around the needs of the people, not the needs of itself.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The failure of the healthcare system represents not a market failure as some suggest, but rather a government failure. The solution is simple: deregulate the markets and make them available to all Americans. Remove barriers between state health insurance plans. Move to a private medical accreditation system. Liberate new medical procedures from the bureaucracy of the FDA. These simple solutions will cover much of the progress towards a better health system, which would be capped off with tax credits and a voucher system for health insurance.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): Our current healthcare system is ok, but something has to be done about the expansion of government funded programs like Medicare. There is no need for Medicare to be a major insurer.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: To increase competition across borders and lower skyrocketing prices on healthcare, we need to allow the American people to import drugs from places such as Canada.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY): The government needs to fund all of healthcare. Currently Medicare and Medicaid only cover hospital bills for the first 2 months before they cover basic doctor's bills and often times it is very hard to get proper treatment from any doctor that isn't a primary care physician simply because medicare is underfunded.
 * Would you propose a new fossil fuel tax?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Doing so would only help us kill one of our most important industries in the country, and it would brought the country to recession.
 * Senator Ryder: I will not tax on important industries such as fossil fuels but instead encourage use others.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We certainly should enact taxes on the petrol industry. This'll not only give us a significant boost in our national income, but it will push the petrol companies to reform their research into greener forms of energy.
 * Senator Cameron: We should not tax fossil fuels but rather provide incentives for alternative energy.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Gas prices are at their lowest for decades; now is the ideal time to raise the gasoline tax to fund new infrastructure upgrades, such as a high-speed railway linking major cities. We should also implement a carbon tax and heavily subsidize renewable energy sources.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY): No, there is little to no reason on why this is needed. Like I said, why would there be record Artic and Antartic ice cap coverage? Or why would the east coast of the the United States be getting a record amount of snow this weekend? Something is inconsistent here. So no, there should not be a new fossil fuel tax. Plus, it also increases the burden on corporations, and would increase electrical bills for Americans.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I will not consider a tax at this present time.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : A "fossil fuel tax" is not only hyper-destructive, as it would place a tax on nearly any form of commerce, but it is also antithetical to private property. The idea of property is that, once you own something you have the right to use that item. A fossil fuel tax, such as the cap-and-trade idea divorce property rights from usage rights and begins down the slippery road to government-owned property that is leased for private use.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: I am fearful of any large new taxes out of concern that they will become solidified within the political system, but seeing the threat that climate change presents, I think we need an across-the board fossil fuel tax to incentivise alternative forms of energy while tightening our belt before the going really gets tough. That way, the US will become a world leader in environmental affairs and we won't have to impose a more punitive tax down the road when the climate really begins to warm.
 * Abdallah Salem (D-NY):

Foreign Affairs Issues
Read Backstory for details.
 * What should the US do about its illegal immigrants?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Illegal immigrants are a danger for the rights of every American for a safe job. All they do is stealing local jobs, and we should not allow that.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We should have tougher legislation that can easily identify any hostile threats to our country, but we should still welcome them in.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): America's strength lies in immigration. With net migration from Mexico now negative, and illegal immigrants an essential part of our economy who do jobs no one else is willing to do, we need to provide a comprehensive path to citizenship for all illegal migrants within our borders, halt the oppressive policies states like Texas apply to illegal immigrants through federal action, and extend federal benefits to illegal immigrants in the immediate term.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  Illegal immigrants have and have been a huge problem for our country. 12.6 million people that aren't supposed to be in this country are taking loads of jobs that could be given to American citizens. What I propose is this; we should give illegal immigrants a specific amount of time to either apply for a visa, or to get out of our country. If they do neither, they should be sentenced to a couple months prison, then deported. That simple.
 * Senator Ryder: We need to toughen up on non- regulated immigration. Any of them caught will be deported and we need to be stern about defending our borders.
 * Senator Cameron: Immigrants strengthen America as a whole. I believe a path to citizenship should be offered to those willing to pay taxes.
 * Sec of State Whitmore: I believe the immigration system needs to be reformed. Illegal immigrants should have to go through the same system as everyone else, and until that system is reformed, it will take generations to get through. Until such reform we should patrol the border and secure it as best we can in order to prevent any trade in drugs or weapons from Mexico's Drug War.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Addressing the illegal immigrant issue without addressing immigration as a whole is addressing a symptom without tackling the cause. In the past century, immigration has become increasingly difficult even as our economy expands and new jobs become available. We need to liberalize our immigration procedures to be closer to that of the late 1800s in Ellis Island. For the current 11 million undocumented migrants, we ought to offer non-violent migrants an opportunity to stay and work in this nation if they come out of the shadows, pay a fine and all back-taxes, and move to the back of the line for citizenship.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): The problem with immigration is that many are coming here illegally looking for a dream that does not exist. Having a liberal immigration policy will not improve the economy. Adding more people to a nation that cannot provide work for them is asinine. This isn't 1897. This is 2016, and the circumstances of the last century have changed. People use "we're a nation of immigrants" to justify an unsustainable action, allowing a tide of migrants to flood a nation that is already struggling economically. I don't support rounding them all up and sending them "down south", but I do support dealing with the ones we know about and are trying to get into this nation illegally. And I'll just say what everyone knows but won't say. We need to change the additudes of Hispanic Americans, and ensure they understand that this country has laws, and supporting illegal immigration simply because you know the people coming over isn't going to make their behavior any less illegal.
 * Mayor Abram Klements: Before we go on a mass deportation spree or allow more immigrants without thinking about it, we need to take a long hard look at why people go to the US illegally, rather than waiting in line. The answer is simple, that it is usually easier to go north illegally than jump through all the hoops of legal immigration. We need to tighten border security while making it easier to come to the US to cut down on the number of undocumented immigrants. As far as the ones already here, it would do more harm than good to them and to the economy to deport them, just for them to head back through the pipeline. The second best time to get something done is now.
 * How much should the US be spending on its military? What cuts should there be, if any?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Cuts? In this period of war and terrorism? We should spend as much as necessary to make sure that the troops can defend America and democracy.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  As I said in my tax plan, I said I would cut military spending by one-fourth to help pay off our national debt. Moreover, I want to make another point; The United States of America is NOT the world's policeman. We should not interfere with the ideas and interests of other nations. Quite simple. This country has gotten involved in so many wars, frankly, a return to isolationism would be made in heaven.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): The US has the highest-funded military in the world, of course we should cut the spending at least by a sixth. Our national economy is still floundering because of this, and it'll certainly release some pressure in the economy if we reduce the military spending.
 * Senator Ryder: We cannot cut what makes our country safe and secure. I don't see the US as the world policeman but having served I can tell you the best defence is a good offensive. We need to have a strong and tough military. Do we need to spend our money more carefully yes. The US could still achieve the same level of power or more by turning a number of active soldiers into reservists and putting that money back into the soldiers equipment. The new F-35 is costing the US billions with little actual improvements over current aircraft or other designs which are much cheaper. We need to fight smarter not harder.
 * Senator Cameron: We should cut military spending, particularly when budget cuts are in order. America is not the world's policeman.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I believe the US Military, as any branch of government, can be made more efficient. I will ask the various generals what they don't need in terms of spending, as several have come forward and said that they are being given money they don't need. That money can be redirected towards other uses. I also think that military budgets should be open to investigation, just like any other department, and not be a blank check. That being said, with the rise of the Sharia Caliphate and a resurgent Russia redefining the borders of the world, I think we need to remain prepared as best we can.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The United States spends more on its military than the next 10 nations combined; this level of spending is not sustainable and ultimately not productive. Due to the theory of marginal returns, we can actualize substantial cuts to the military without impairing its ability to protect the United States and its interests - its primary purpose. One key way to do this is for greater devolution to state militias and the National Guard, which served our nation under Washington and Jefferson. Protecting American citizens is the first job of the Commander-in-Chief, but we cannot afford to make the military-industrial complex fat off the American people's dime.
 * Vice President Charles Morgan (D-IL): We have the means to make the military an even more awesome force in the world. We must combat the fears of the right, and prove to the American people that the military can be downsized, physically and financially. We are spending billions on things that we do not need. As Vice President, I was privy to the spending of the military, and I can say without revealing anything, that we are spending on absolute nonsense. We can downsize the budget without downsizing on the military potential. I say this as a military man, that quality will always surpass quantity, and the sooner we realize that, the better.
 * Should the US intervene in Syria (Syria is different than in OTL, read the backstory)?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Some say that we should stay here and no interfere as democracy is destroyed and populations are murdered. We need to act now, I say, and bring true democracy in the Middle East! Only America can do it, and we will act accordingly.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  I think we not should intervene in Syria, because of the fear it may turn into a failed state. I mean, look at what happened. We went into Libya (which I was against) and look at what happened there. It's a mess. I say we let the issue work itself, and then see how it goes afterword. If a democracy arises in Syria, you can expect my full support. However, if a war-bent dictatorship arises, expect American eyes looking overseas if it conflicts with out allies interests.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We shouldn't intervene with our troops in the already heated Middle East. Maybe if the Sharia Caliphate was able to completely annex the al-Assad regime then yes, we would, but if not, we'll just continue to send airstrikes to the region instead of our own men and women.
 * Senator Ryder: If the lives of American citizens are not at risk or will not be at risk then I cannot support intervening. Air strikes are to expensive and ineffectual and a ground invasion if expensive and costly. The situation will sort itself out but if a threat to the US arises then as always I will be there to stop it.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: The United States is the single strongest force for good in this world. The War on Terror and Arab Spring have brought considerable benefits to the region, namely a stable Iraq, an Afghanistan free of Taliban tyranny, and free and democratic elections in Tunisia and Syria. I helped bring about two successful scenarios of regime change in the Middle East. I believe that Syria, as one of the success stories of the Arab Spring, should be defended against a monstrosity that openly beheads and crucifies those it deems apostates. This terrorist threat is on the shores of the Mediterranean and is already close to undoing all the progress the region has accomplished thus far. I don't support getting American ground troops involved at this present time, but failing to support the legitimate government of Syria will be a significant failure of American foreign policy.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The greatest asset that the United States can lend to the fight against the Sharia Caliphate is its organizational prowess. As President, I will negotiate to arrange for a coalition of Arab nations to restore order to Syria on behalf of the democratically-elected government of that nation. The attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001 were, according to Osama bin Laden, the results of  American intervention in the First Gulf War. By intervening directly again, we will only be fueling extremist cells in the Middle East. As prominent Muslim clerics are arguing, we must allow the Muslims to expel the jihadists to preserve order in the region, and the best role the United States can play is as a mediator in the Syrian conflict.
 * Senator Cameron: I will also arrange a coalition of Arab countries to help fight the Sharia caliphate. However, we will send some U.S troops to help forces and survey their progress.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): The only legitimate way we can counter extreme Muslims is by organizing and supporting Muslims to oppose them. Intervening directly plays into their rhetoric and enables them to recruit more fighters, as well as exposing the United States to attack. We need to organize a coalition of Muslim nations - Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, Iran - to destroy the so-called Caliphate and resort order to Syria. Our role should be humanitarian assistance and diplomatic backing, nothing more.
 * Should the US accept refugees from civil wars in the Middle East?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Would you let a stranger in your home and tell him "Come in! And don't forget to blow my house and kill my daughter!"? Would you?
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  Before we even say the word "refugee", a lot of people traveling into Europe aren't even from areas even close to the Sharia Caliphate. Now that that's out of the way, let's look up at Europe. Europe is letting refugees in, and women are now restricted in some places from travelling alone. Or Sweden, where the rape rate alone has increased by 1400%. This is simply because they let "refugees" in. Though I do believe in humanitarian aid for these people, I don't think we should really accept them into our country, as they also may be a Trojan Horse trying to get into our country to cause terror.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I somewhat agree with Governor Jones on this issue, we must look at the refugee crisis with open eyes and a realist sense of perception. There is a certain chance that these refugees will have the same effect on our country as in Sweden, where rape has dangerously increased. However, I also believe that since the US is way bigger in terms of geography than Sweden, it will be less exemplified and more broad. But for now, I say that we accept these refugees with somewhat open arms.
 * Senator Ryder: It is not our problem. It might be nice to take them in but not easy or worth the trouble. They don't speak the language (have no interest in learning) or want to understand our culture. Lets face it they just want to turn up here and turn this place into the hell-hole they came from. Not possible.
 * Senator Cameron: My republican counterparts are fear mongering. Refugees pose little threat to America and strengthen our country as a whole. However, refugees should be willing to have jobs and pay taxes.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I believe that we should strengthen screening for such refugees, especially for ones originating from countries afflicted by Islamic terrorism and the Sharia Caliphate.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : As President, I will take the job of admitting refugees extremely seriously. We must consider potential terror threats, but we must not be overwhelmed by fear-mongerers. By definition, refugees are seeking a better life and are willing to go to extreme lengths to obtain that better life. As Emma Lazarus wrote over a century ago: " Give me your tired, your poor,/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Generally, my policy will be one of welcome for refugees who pass rigorous safety standards, specifically Arab Christians, moderates, and those with advanced degrees in medicine and engineering who can contribute to our economy.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): In the vast majority of cases our intervention started the conflicts that produce these refugees; we cannot stand back and watch as people made homeless by organizations armed with American weapons and given power by the chaos American intervention created. It is morally imperative that we accept these refugees, subject of course to screening. If terrorists want to enter America, they will do so legally, not as refugees.
 * How can the US stop terrorism at home?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Former President Conroy did a lot for our country, but after he left office, it became clear he didn't do enough to protect our country against terrorism. Many is still to do, and I will be the one who will bring down terrorism in America. No more boms, no more deaths. A safe America for the Americans!
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  We all know terrorism has been a huge problem in our country, and how our civil liberties have been curbed to combat it. The TSA has been touching people even though it's been proven as an ineffective way to combat terrorism. What I propose we do to protect ourselves from these terrorists is that we arm ourselves to protect from potential terrorists to neutralize them.
 * Senator Ryder: It is not easy but it can be done. The NSA need to be supported and not harassed for trying to defend us. Plus I will make it more difficult for terrorists to enter the country as well as ensure that if the terrorists are operating from somewhere we strike their.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: We need to increase screening for refugees coming into this country as well as cooperate with companies like Facebook and Twitter to shut down accounts supporting radical ideologies that threaten the lives of others.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Fighting terrorism at home is one of the top priorities of any President, but we must respect our founding documents. From the NSA's constant eavesdropping to the TSA's grope-and-search to unconstitutional detention at Guantanamo Bay, our record on protecting civil liberties while fighting terrorism has not lived up to our ideals. To prevent home-grown attacks, we must ensure that adequate deterants to terror are available, such as meaningful employment. We must also use stronger targetting techniques; instead of catching all Americans in the dragnet, I propose catching only terrorists - and doing so before they act!
 * Senator Cameron: Fighting terrorism in the United States will be an uphill battle. However, with the right policies, we can make it possible. We have to cooperate with local American Muslims to root out extremism. We must also make sure Muslims are not discriminated against. This leads to less extreme and hateful feelings to Americans. Lastly, we must make assault weapons available only to those who have undergone training and extensive background checks.
 * What is your opinion about the Iran nuclear deal? What actions will you take regarding this?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): One of our priority is to make sure that our allies in the Middle East must be protect from any possible nuclear threat from Iran. Should Iran show any sign of building a nuclear weaponry, we will act accordingly.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  The Iran nuclear deal was one of the worst deals our country made in history. Not only did we allow Iran to have to capability to create a nuclear bomb, but we betrayed our Middle Eastern Allies. Ladies and gentlemen, If I'm elected president, I'm ripping up the current peace deal and returning to the status quo of an embargo. It's an embarrassment to us and our country.
 * Senator McCarthy: We should carefully look at Iran and make sure they don't pull off anything too suspicious, that's about it.
 * Senator Ryder: I would like to think that we won here or we got a good deal but I am suspicious. I am happy to allow the deal to go ahead but if I catch the slightest win that they broke it they will wish they were back to an embargo.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I agree with the statement of Rep. Thorpe, and to add to that I will take a long hard look at the deal and Iran's actions. If Iran breaks any such elements of the deal or returns to reprehensible actions, then the full force of sanctions will be considered and applied as needed. If Iran is discovered to have any relation with this Shia Sharia Caliphate that now threatens Syria and Afghanistan, the response will be even harsher.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : While I was not a fan of how the nuclear deal was secretly orchestrated, I believe that it being in effect will serve to make the world a safer place. Dialogue is always better than armed stand-offs, and being able to work with the Iranians is a notable step forward for a non-interventionist foreign policy. As President, I will ensure that Iran fulfills its side of the bargain and would be willing to impose snap-back sanctions should the need arise. I would also like to point out that Governor Jones, while claiming to support isolationism, advocates taking economically aggressive actions towards a generally peaceable nation in a global hotspot.
 * Senator Cameron: I support the Iran nuclear deal so long as Iran keeps its word. We must cooperate with Arab countries and send inspectors to confirm Iran's nuclear program has been dismantled.
 * How will you protect against cyber attacks and hacking such as the attack that Russia did in 2014?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): We must react accordingly against Russia, and make them understand that we are in charge. Should I be president, I will not tolerate any sort of assault against our national security like President Walker did.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  To stop Russian hacks, we'd need to hire a professional company to upgrade our security system. Now granite, I'm not a fan of spending the government's thefted tax money, but this is a serious problem. I propose we hire a professional company to upgrade our national security.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We need tougher security and better restriction in order to prevent this from happening ever again. Edward Snowden was easily able to hack into our private files years ago without any major issues, which is a clear and obvious sign that our system is failing.
 * Senator Ryder: It is an outrage that one it was possible for Russia to do this and two that they got away with it. If elected I will first of all give more money from our defence budget to improve our cyber security. Then the next country who pulls a stunt like that will know economic ruin.
 * Senator Cameron: We must begin a large-scale encryption of government information to protect from foreign powers.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I agree with the majority of the statements above. We need to regain cyber security and re-establish our reputation and credibility to the rest of the world. The cyber attacks need to stop or they will be met in kind.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Our national security is of the utmost importance, and putting servicemen and -women's personal information at risk is not acceptable. We must realize that modern warfare includes the data front in addition to traditional war fronts. As President, I will look for private enterprise solutions to safeguard the privacy of the men and women in uniform.
 * What do you think of President Walker's actions to lift the embargo with Cuba?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Although it is a good thing to see Cuba finally accepting capitalism, I think the President should have asked for more out of this deal. Our position in Cuba is still difficult, and Walker could have done something about it. He didn't. In the end, Cuba came winner out of it instead of us, and it is something we cannot tolerate.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  We should have not lifted our embargo off Cuba. I'll tell you why; Cuba did not become a democratic state. We should have kept the pressure up until Cuba was forced to change into a democracy, the form of government that has made our country the freest in all of history. The lifting of this embargo shows that we work with opressors, and that's something we should not be proud of.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I believe that easing tensions with Cuba is certainly the best option that President Walker could've chosen. We're not in the Cold War anymore, and we must amend diplomatic relations with former Soviet countries to prove to the world that we have truly passed on from such a diplomatic quagmire.
 * Senator Ryder: The deal with Cuba has been needed for a while. Lets face it there aren't any nuclear weapons there and Cuba were never plotting our downfall. Lets move on and who cares if they haven't chosen democracy their loss.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I am willing to give peace a chance, but I feel as though Cuba needs to be watched. The regime may try to use this as an attempt to build itself up, and I am fully committed towards replacing the last dictatorship in the western hemisphere with a liberal democracy.
 * Senator Cameron: I believe it is a step in the right direction. The Cold War is over and other countries should not have to continue to deal with its repercussions.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Once again, we hear anti-libertarian commentary from a so-called Libertarian, Governor Jones. Free trade is the bulwark of libertarian foreign policy, but Governor Jones is advocating for embargoes and restrictions to free trade! I am no fan of the Castro regime, but open dialogue is the only way to ensure a peaceful American impact on our neighbor's eventual transition to democracy. Likewise, open trade is the only way to ensure a peaceful return to capitalism for Cuba and raise the Cuban people from the morass their government's socialist planning has created.
 * Should the US continue to support Israel? Should it recognize Palestine?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Israel as been our friend for more than half a century, and we should continue this great relation with them. We should also help Israel reach peace with Palestine, in order to bring preace in the Middle East.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  Israel bas been our ally in the Middle East AND is a democracy there. While I don't support Israel and their treatment of Palestinians, we could play a key part in helping to create a two state solution.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): Israel has been our greatest and most dedicated ally in the Middle East for decades and while I personally oppose their treatment of the Palestinians, we need to make sure that an anti-Jihad and democratic state stays in the Middle East for as long as it can happen.
 * Senator Ryder: We need to support Israel and I will never recognize Palestine. The issue over there is complicated but lets face it Israel is not anywhere near the worst whatever some Muslim jihad may claim. We need to support them to keep a stable middle east.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I will continue to support Israel as needed. I will not recognize Palestine as a nation until it and Israel have agreed to a binding deal that will ensure the safety and political stability of both nations and Palestine has abandoned violent militant ideology against any nation.
 * Senator Cameron: I will also continue to support Israel. However, if Israel and Palestine are able to make a deal I am 100 percent willing to recognize Palestine.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Under the Walker administration, relations with Israel have fallen to a new low. This is immensely regretable for a nation that has been an American ally and a bastion for democracy in the Middle East for half a century. The US should continue to support Israel, but should urge the nation to make a vital decision: either allow moderate Palestinians full rights of citizenship or continue to move towards a viable two-state solution. Both Israel and the United States were founded on democracy, liberty and peace, and these solutions will serve to fulfill both of our nations' ideals.
 * Senator Afewerek (D-MN): Israel's government has repudiated a two-state solution. We need to pressure it to halt settlement building and remove its forces of occupation from Palestine; this may include an end to arms sales or the recognition of Palestine.
 * How much foreign aid should the US be giving?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): I think most countries are good enough to do it on their own. However, I think America would be willing to help anyone in order to help democracy.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  We shouldn't really be getting involved in issues with other countries. Look at what happened when we went into Syria - a huge mess. I think the United States should return to a time of isolationism, but we should keep open the few military ties we already have (Israel and South Korea).
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): While I certainly believe we must help those people in need of basic supplies in Third World countries, I also think that we must establish slight isolationism in this front. We have to focus on our domestic problems; the poverty gap is constantly growing and the middle class is shrinking, our debt to China grows larger every day, and we still have not achieved the dream of Martin Luther King in terms of racial equality.
 * Senator Ryder: Every time we give them foreign aid they waste it on a space program. No more money to line wallets of oil barons and tea lords.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I think we need to examine this issue on a case by case basis and decide from there.
 * Senator Cameron: On this front America has spent far too much money. We must lower the amount of foreign aid given to be able to lower our debt. However, in disasters such as severe war, famine, severe natural disaster, etc., I am open to giving some foreign aid.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : The United States is not the world's policeman and it is not the world's donor. We cannot continue to pump billions of American taxpayers' dollars away from our nation - which could readily use improvements to infrastructure and other necessary services - to third-world despotates to enrich hostile dictators. The billions of dollars paid out annually to fund militaries around the world is counter-productive to our American ideal of peace and liberty for all.
 * How do you plan to stop the growth of Al Qaeda and the Sharia Caliphate?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): If we do anything other than direct action against them, it will be ineffective.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  What I propose we do to cut the head off the Sharia Caliphate is to bomb their oil industry. It's been shown that their biggest source of income, and we haven't been targeting it enough. Once Russia actually targeted the Sharia Caliphates Oil, their economic base was crippled. We need to bomb their oil, continue airstrikes, and support the Kurds fighting with information and positions about the Sharia Caliphate.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): I agree with Governor Jones on this front.
 * Senator Ryder: The Sharia Caliphate are a major threat us and we have to deal with them. The best way is by backing vaguely sensible groups on the ground with training, weapons and vital supplies this way they can fight for homeland and we can be safe in ours. If that doesn't work we might just have to drop a couple of bombs on them.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I believe we need to strike their leadership and resource capabilities in order to deprive them of everything they can get. I also believe we need to provide the governments of Afghanistan and Syria with air support, weapons, and information. This isn't Libya. We actually know who to support here.
 * Senator Cameron: We must work with our Arab allies and send Arab forces, along with some U.S troops to assist Arab forces, to attack the Sharia caliphate. This strategy would be of minimal cost. We will also support groups fighting the Sharia Caliphate.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Why do al-Qaeda and the Sharia Caliphate target the United States as the Great Satan? Is it because of our success and freedom or is it because of our constant meddling in their homeland. The United States has brought upon itself and the Middle East substantial backfire as a result of decades of incessant interventionism. The first solution is to take away the jihadists raison d'etre. Then, we must build a coalition of moderate Muslim nations who are willing to take on these terrorist groups. America can provide moral leadership and training to those who will counter these radical insurgents.
 * How should the US act regarding Russia following their cyber attack and actions in Crimea?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): We should coordinate our efforts with the European Union and make Russia understand that they do not have their place in Ukraine.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  Military action would not solve any problems regarding our computer security. What I propose that we should do is place economic sanctions on Russia for every Russian or foreign hack that happens. We should not tolerate these attacks.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): We need to truly humble Putin and his regime, and truly show to him that we are and will always be the greatest nation on Earth.
 * Senator Ryder: I don't want a war but we don't need one. Putin stands all big and cocky but that is because we let him. Whatever he might think no nation can withstand western economic sanctions and if we place a total embargo the next time Putin makes a move we can make him back done or if not there is dissent inside of Russia they just need some guns.
 * Senator Cameron: A war with Russia would be very costly and ineffective - as well as wasting American blood. I believe we should cooperate with the EU and continue sanctions on Russia. However, if Russia attacks any NATO country we will warn them of the possibility of going to war.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: I will not consider open war with Russia at this time but I will make it abundantly clear that any attack on a NATO member will mean war with the United States and any further attempts to redraw sovereign boundaries will be met with dire consequences.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : Once again, a self-proclaimed isolationst calls for aggressive actions to be taken against a foreign state. I believe that, as President, I will be able to stand up to Putin and meet with him in person, outlining a clear set of parameters to his behavior. He must be made aware that any attack on a NATO ally will be seen as an attack on the United States and that he must respect popular sovereignty and the rights of all citizens, including those in the Russian LGBT community. With this in mind, however, we must be careful not rattle our sabers to loudly, provoking the Russian bear to strike.
 * Should people Muslims be allowed to immigrate to the US? What if they are from a suspect country such as Libya?
 * Representative Thorpe (R-ID): Although our country is built on immigration, I believe we should strenghten our immigration policies and only allow those that we are entirely sure that they will be no threat to our country.
 * Governor Ron Jones (L-KY):  The United States has allowed the most immigration from all counties in this world, allowing people to live together in peace and prosperity. I think we should let Muslims in (Heck, my aunt has married a Turkish immigrant) but we should also give them a test to see how tolerant they are of other opinions. Respecting other opinions has been something we've been doing for years (or maybe not) so really this is just a key to see if they are offended and could get triggered easily.
 * Senator McCarthy (D-CT): Of course! Our country is in a state of Islamophobia, and we must end it.
 * Senator Ryder: Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims. We have to face it while the Sharia Caliphate exists and Al Qaeda we have to suspect them. I don't want a blanket ban on their immigration but ones coming from Libya and Syria are not okay and the ones from other places need to be monitored by the NSA.
 * Senator Cameron: Restricting an entire race from entering the United States goes against our core values as Americans. A ban like this could be considered nothing else besides racism.
 * ​Sec of State Whitmore: Muslims should be allowed to immigrate to the United States. However, as I said earlier, there should be advanced screening for those coming from significant conflict areas.
 * Senator Luke Recks (L-NH) : At the base of the Statue of Liberty runs a poem by Emma Lazarus, where Lady Liberty asks to be sent the huddled masses, yearning to breath the air of freedom. I echo that noble sentiment, regardless of nationality and religion. Immigration should not be unconstitutionally restricted based on religion. That does not mean we should throw caution to the wind when welcoming immigrants from troubled nations, but such restrictions will only fuel the jihadist threat against our great nation.

Resources
There are five "resources" which each candidate must use. See above for explanations. Each candidate gets fifteen total "resource" points to allocate between the five resources. Independent and Libertarian candidates may not spend more than five points on Name Recognition. This is just your baseline, but some of your decisions will affect this.

Please post your baseline resource allocations below:

Richard Thorpe:
 * Name Recognition: 2
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 4
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 5

Robert McCarthy: 
 * Name Recognition: 4
 * Trustworthiness: 4
 * Likability: 5
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 1

Abdallah Salem:

Senator Afewerek:
 * Name Recognition:3
 * Trustworthiness:2
 * Likability:6
 * Fundraising:1
 * Legitimacy:3


 * Name Recognition: 3
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 7
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 1

Ron Jones (L-KY) Senator Ryder Luke Recks (L-NH) Abram Klements Charles Morgan: Richard A. Champion: Nathan Cameron: Alexander Whitmore: Anthony Xavier Mitchell: Amy Haas
 * Name Recognition - 4
 * Trustworthiness - 2
 * Likability - 2
 * Fundraising - 3
 * Legitimacy - 4
 * Name recognition- 3
 * Trustworthiness- 2
 * Likability-2
 * Fundraising- 5
 * Legitimacy- 3
 * Name Recognition: 5
 * Trustworthiness: 2
 * Likability: 2
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 4
 * Name Recognition: 5
 * Trustworthiness: 1
 * Likability: 7
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 1
 * Name Recognition: 6
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 1
 * Fundraising: 2
 * Legitimacy: 3
 * Name recognition: 6
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 3
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 2
 * Name Recognition: 3
 * Trustworthiness: 4
 * Likability: 3
 * Fundraising: 2
 * Legitimacy: 3
 * Name Recognition: 4
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 3
 * Fundraising: 2
 * Legitimacy: 3
 * Name Recognition: 3
 * Trustworthiness: 3
 * Likability: 3
 * Fundraising: 3
 * Legitimacy: 3
 * Name Recognition: 5
 * Trustworthiness: 4
 * Likeability: 4
 * Fundraising: 1
 * Legitimacy: 1