Presidential Debate

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Let's get this started...
How do my opponents feel about doing a simple Q&A- every one can ask questions and we do our best to answer before the voting begin...with opening and closing statements

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Agreed...
Napoleon and Tweed- chime in?

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I'm ok with a partial moderator- we need to debate!

[CLARENCE 2015!]

As do I- Tweed feel free to start things up whenever you want

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Not specifically- I was sent a message to get started here and they should maybe be spoken to as any one else would to see if they want to be involved but it can happen by itself...
If the game has more true discussion and less jib jab and procedure and weeks upon weeks to get a bill thru the Senate- people will join 

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I have a question for my opponents- how to you feel about our nation getting involved in the Syrian civil war...

I will answer after I post this question

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I am reluctant to involve ourselves in conflicts which do not involve the security of our people directly- as a veteran of such a conflict. However- preventing massacres is a mission which is a core value of our nation and if this were a one sided slaughter I would advocate air strikes against Assad's forces to give the rebels safe zones to plan their counterattacks...
As it usually is- this conflict may not be as one sided as we initially read. I've read the rebels have banned Christians from an area they control. I don't know if this is true- but I know that we don't know all the facts. Before any involvement in Syria- I would want all of the facts on my desk... I'd want to see that this was a slaughter of innocent people before getting involved and I'd want to be sure we weren't aiding some one who may be hostile to us, our allies, or other innocent people
If those circumstances were met- I'd authorize air strikes against Assad's forces, arming the rebels to give them the ability to compete with the advanced technology Assad has thru the Iranians and Russians, but would not place troops on the ground with the possible exception of ARmy Special Forces (Green Berets for the common term) or Navy SEALs to train rebel forces

A full scale invasion or occupation would be out of the question...

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Where does each candidate stand on regional restructuring?  Also, what changes should or should not be made to our current tax code?

Scott- I'm going to wait until the other candidates have answered question 2 and then answer your two questions separately....

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Question for all candidates

I would like to hear your thoughts on ideology. What place does it have in Atlasia? Would you emphasize it? Is Atlasia boring without it? Compared to your opponents, how ideological are you? How would you describe your ideology, and from what principles is it derived?

Averroes Nix- that is a great question and it goes to the core of my campaign. It's no surprise that I don't share the ideology of most of you on this board- but that is the beauty of it. That's what makes my experience fun... the discussions and debates that result from that difference. I've put forward bills you could consider right wing- the Pregnant Women Support Act going thru now could arguably be considered that- and put forward bills that are against my views- such as Polnut's broadcaster bill that I sponsored because it was worthy of discussion as all ideas are. The reality is Nix- this is an internet board... no actual lives are affected by the policies we put forward so I hope all of our dedication to an ideology or party can be less then what it would be in our true lives... instead, I put discusion and debate with people whose views and experiences are far different from my own. Out of these discussions- I've gained mutual respect for so many of you

As for my own ideology- I would say I'm closer to the center then any of my opponents so that may mean less ideological, but my views are equally as strong and my commitment to them is also. I would describe my ideology as being formed in my life experience- whether in the Navy particularly my tours in Vietnam, whether as a small business owner for 25 years, whether as a husband and a father... any of my many, many many life experiences have played a role in shaping my beliefs. I am patriotic above all else- I believe that govt should generally stay out of the way of letting individuals and businesses reach their full potential but should be there for those who need speaking for- I count the unborn as among these numbers. I believe in a constant march towards equality- and I believe that applies equally to giving gays the right to marry and getting rid of reverse racism- affirmative action. I believe that our place in the world must be considered and our people must come before anything else, but that we have a military for a reason and if our cause is just we must not hesitate to use force- but being a veteran of a questionable war I will always be reluctant to give the go ahead for the placement of troops on the ground.

In short- I am a complex man. I've had a whole lot of life experience that gives me a diverse mix of views... As President I will argue my views till I die- I will veto legislation which I disagree with- and you know what.... just as I have with every person I've disagreed with and debated- we will come out of these debates with greater mutual respect and understanding because that is what this should be about

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Where does each candidate stand on regional restructuring?  Also, what changes should or should not be made to our current tax code?

Scott- I'm going to wait until the other candidates have answered question 2 and then answer your two questions separately....

Since others have gone ahead I don't want to be late to the party...

Regional restructuring- the district idea that Oakvale mentioned definitely has merit... As a former regional legislator I saw that Emperor PiT does not have all that much to do and anything that could put more on his plate would be a good idea. I saw the Governor in the Pacific get booted for not opening up an election... we have a problem and I have not much experience in this game to form an opinion but will listen to those who have and implement the choice of the people.

Tax code- I've long been in favor of a fair tax- a national sales tax which measures consumption instead of income. I find it more "fair" as it relies on personal choices, not personal success. I thought Herman Cain's 9-9-9 was a good idea in theory and was worth discussing... any small business owner especially but also any one who pays taxes knows what a burden it is- and to simplify it would be a great help to many people. This must be balanced with the goal of balancing the budget and ensuring revenue maintains its levels to meet our spending- which must be constantly cut. I largely support Polnut's budget and would not change too much from the way things are now...it seems we are on the path to revenue neutral and if we can get bipartisan agreement on that- that is a boon to our economy

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I am confident that uselectionatlas.org has nothing to do with Syria and never will have anything to do with Syria.

Doesn't have to do much with taxes either and regions and offices here mean nothing... but isn't the point here to "play doctor" and be in the Fantasy land where what we type on an internet board actually matters?

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I am confident that uselectionatlas.org has nothing to do with Syria and never will have anything to do with Syria.

Doesn't have to do much with taxes either and regions and offices here mean nothing... but isn't the point here to "play doctor" and be in the Fantasy land where what we type on an internet board actually matters?

that's your deal.  Tweedist Atlasia won't delude itself.

Tweed- I understand what you're saying and I agree some what with the attitude behind it... I've been mentioning it when I say that not one thing we do here actually affects a single person and we must look at ideology and party lines thru that lens

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Another great question- the answer is because I am some one who values the debate and discussion above all else. I've seen some great Senate debates- for example between wormyguy and Scott... say what you want about either of these fellas but they had a very good debate about the mountaintop removal bill. We have a President right now who is a great guy and a great leader- he finds consensus and that is important in Washington or Canberra or Ottawa or London... not as much here considering what we do doesn't affect actual lives. I may compromise of course out of necessity, but not after doing the best to fight for my views.

Ask yourself- what will be more interesting- a President who agrees with most of us on most issues and governs that way? Or a President who will do some controversial sh**t every once in a while. If the Secretary of External Affairs tells me Iran has missiles in the silos, you can expect me to respond with military action to prevent the launch of those missiles... that will bring debate and discussion to the Senate and the game. When I put my budget forward- I am supporting Polnut's generally as is everybody, but mine would be coming from the right and will probably get some folks on the left a bit riled up- that will bring  debate and discussion to the Senate and the game. With both foreign and domestic issues- I have views which sometimes go against what the mainstream is on this board- and all the time we argue those issues in a way which leaves both sides with mutual respect and understanding...

That is what you can expect from a President Clarence

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Another question: What is the outline your plan for immigration? Do you plan to make any changes? Are you satisfied with the status quo? What role, if any, should regional governments play?

(If anyone else asks a question, please hold your answer and let them hear from you first.)

I essentially support the DREAM Act from what I have read about it- or maybe it is the Rubio Plan... I am not sure what the differences are to be frank. If a person came here as a child and has remained crime-free and either received an education, held constant work, or served in the military- that person ought to be allowed to stay in the country. It would be inhumane, illogical, and impractical to deport them...
If those circumstances are not met, however- I would favor deportation. I believe that itself is practical due to the fact that most immigrants are here to chase the American Dream and know that to do so requires hard work and sound character. As far as regions- I would clearly value the opinions of the Pacific Region and my Imperial Dominion of the South as we are the regions mostly affected by illegal immigration... I know for a fact that much of the agriculture in the Florida Heartland relies on migrant workers- mostly illegal. Ask Minute Maid if they'd like to deport any illegal worker we find- you want the price of your Florida orange juice to double???

In short- my immigration policy would be based on practicality, common sense, and compassion... the aspect of my country I am most proud of is the fact that on our most precious monument- the Statue of Liberty- the words inscribed are as follows...

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I will stand up always and fight for that to be our creed... if you are here and work hard and play by the rules, I welcome you

[CLARENCE 2015!]

...preventing massacres is a mission which is a core value of our nation
...
A full scale invasion or occupation would be out of the question...

Seems a bit contradictory.  If you're going to a gunfight, you don't bring a knife.  Either we're in with the rebels, or we're in with Doctor Assad, or we're not in it at all.  Those are the only three choices.  You can't really pick any other, can you?  I'm not saying there's a right or a wrong here, but you can't have it both ways.  If you're going to support Dr. Assad's overthrow with your voice, then back it up with policy and funding.  Otherwise, step out of the kitchen. 

I guess my own inclination is that we should step out, but if you can make a convincing economic argument that we should involve ourselves, then do it.  But whatever you do, don't be like Bush's daddy and encourage the rebels, only to give them just enough rope to hang themselves while they're waiting for American support. 

On another topic, the DREAM act, I'm with you. 

One thing to keep in mind is that these atlasia elections often stray to imagined, forum-related policies.  Things like the DREAM act and Syria, as important as they are to the Romney-Obama debates, don't sway voters in these elections.  Nevertheless, since you brought the issue up, I'd like to hear how you would limit us to fly-over mission against the Assad regime, and even if that fails, how you save face in the international community when that fails to unseat him.

Thank you, angus- I am always glad to discuss

I believe the mistakes that have been made in our nation's recent wars- going back to my war in Vietnam- is that we have insisted on nationbuilding rather then allowing a people to build their own nation. If we were to invade Syria- beyond sending special operators in there such as Army Special Forces (Green Berets) to train rebel forces- it would lead to nation building.... which would result in our troops dying to enforce tolls on roads, or to enforce drug policy, or other domestic Syrian issues.

My view is that the Syrian people must forge their own way ahead- but that requires an even playing field. I am not very familiar with the situation on the ground in Syria, but from what I've gathered- Assad's forces are far more advanced in training and technology. I believe- as John McCain does- that air strikes could serve to create safe zones in which the rebel leaders could organize and plan their offensives and administrate the areas under their control. I would also potentially authorize air strikes to hit infantry and artillery which appeared prepared to commit a massacre... for example a battalion advancing on an unprotected rebel town. By staying off the ground but authorizing these air strikes- we stay out of the nation building and allow the Syrian rebels to fight THEIR civil war and by evening the playing field- they will actually have a chance

As for the international community- it would be essential that we have their cooperation as we did with Libya. The French and British, as well as Russians and Arab nations, have great interest in the Middle East and this conflict...their involvement and participation would be crucial. However- as I mentioned, I believe it is far too early and we know far too little to make a decision about the use of force at this time. I also believe strongly in the rising practice of drone warfare- I would rather have a USAF 2LT piloting an aircraft from a Las Vegas control center then in the cockpit over Damascus...

[CLARENCE 2015!]

In the Netherlands- there is a very comprehensive program to become a citizen. It is fairly easy I believe to become a permanent resident- but our local guide's husband was working to become a citizen and has to attend courses every weekend. He had to learn Dutch conversationally, had to learn the customs (such as shaking a woman's hand, which may not be culturally natural for a devout Muslim), Dutch history. I found this very interesting and may be an idea to consider

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I have a Question for the candidates, Do you Support a Balanced Budget Amendment and  what Spending will you cut or what taxes will you raise to balance the budget

Yes, I do- thank you for the question. The reason I support this amendment is because of the stalemate we have now... everyone has priorities. I won't favor significant cuts in defense spending; Napoleon, Oakvale, and Tweed have their priorities as well. For too long- this has led to everyone's priorities being maintained and increased year after year after year... Very simply- The federal government must play by the same rules governing every household's finances. I just returned from a trip to Europe- therefore, I am trying to eat at home more, drive less therefore use less gas, and make fewer unnecessary purchases. Families have to make these decisions constantly...

A balanced budget amendment will FINALLY force us to come to the table and work these out. Progress is being made even without an amendment- Polnut's budget in many ways is a step forward and I support it generally. I especially appreciate the financial commitment to veterans. As far as what I would cut- it would be items I deemed unneessary (or less necessary) and also out of the realm of the federal govt... looking at this budget I could say now I would look at cutting-

national broadcaster (and eliminating the levy along with it), cutting Afghanistan operations, Go Green Fund, work to find methods to cut health care (which has had a very productive debate in the Senate)...

As far as taxes- I believe a national sales tax (the fair tax essentially) is more effective as it measures consumption rather then income, but my priority would be to first decrease the spending as our national debt is also a national security problem, I believe.