Presidential Debate

[Oakvale]

Normally, I'd prefer a structured debate, but given that the election is rapidly approaching this may be a good format.

[Oakvale]

No, I don't.

While I understand there's considerable nostalgia for a lot of the old Atlas legends to resume posting here, the fact is it's incredibly unlikely - there's a reason they quit, after all - we should focus on getting newbies to join the game. New blood is the best solution, not a halfhearted attempt at reliving the glories of the past.

If Phil, Al, BRTD, etc, wanted to play the game again, they'd re-register like anyone else. I can't imagine an outreach effort having much success.

[Oakvale]

I'd be opposed to that on pragmatic grounds. While I favour humanitarian intervention in certain circumstances, Syria is not Libya. Assad has a much better army, a stronger grip on power, and, crucially, lacks the vast expanses of desert that made a NATO bombing campaign in Libya possible - a bombing campaign in Syria would almost certainly kill countless civillians and very possibly do almost nothing to destabilize Assad's regime.

It's not a perfect solution, but a UN-brokered ceasefire is the most sensible path to peace here.

[Oakvale]

My opinion on regional restructuring is fairly simple - I'm a former Governor and as such I'm inherently skeptical of grand restructuring proposals. Having said that, there seems to be at least some popular support for such an idea, and I'm not opposed to having a debate about changing the regions if there's enough political will for such a proposal to pass.

One alternative I think it's worth exploring is reintroducing "Districts", which would keep the regions intact as they are but allow the Governors considerable power in redistricting every couple of months. I think this could add an exciting element to the game, and make the position of regional executive much more important on a national level.

I don't have any particular qualms as regards the tax code - certainly I wouldn't support the flat tax that several Senators have proposed in the budget debate! And I'll take this opportunity to say I broadly support the President's budget proposal - the revenue sources included are eminently reasonable, and spending's being brought under control. The path to a balanced budget should be gradual and progressive - vicious cuts will do little but hurt the struggling economy.

[Oakvale]

I think ideology is arguably the heart of the game- if we all agreed on everything, there'd be no debate, no political parties, and no elections, after all. While I generally dislike the simplistic labeling of political positions, I'm a fairly mainstream liberal - I'm to the left on some things, and more moderate on others, but core to my beliefs is that a - reasonably constrained - state can and should support the less fortunate in society. I am a believer in free trade and the free movement of goods and ideas, but I'm not a neoliberal - I believe the state can be a powerful tool, too-often abused to help build a better society for all.

Ideology can cause its share of problems in Atlasia, though - one thing that happens is that one side - normally the left given the political slant of the site - narrowly holds on to power by a consistent margin, which leads to the isolation of opposing viewpoints. I think it's important that Atlasia is inclusive - that the minority is respected, listened to, and, when they have the right idea, that we don't disregard it on blind partisanship.

Partisan politics and ideology are fundamentally intertwined, and are the heart of Atlasia - but we can have vigorous, even heated debate without resorting to the old party-line voting we saw before the dissolution, where the left consistently won elections by single vote margins.

As President, I will strive to include all Atlasians in the work of bringing in a new golden age of competitive elections, interesting debates, and active membership - the game is going through a lull now, yes, but I do truly believe that, if we play our cards right, Atlasia can bounce back stronger than ever. I'm not saying that if your ideas are contrary to my principles that I will adopt it for its own sake, but I can promise that under an Oakvale Presidency all views will be listened to, respected and taken into consideration.


I

[Oakvale]

In response to Governor Nix's second-to-last question - well, first of all, I certainly agree with Governor Napoleon that controversy for its own sake is ultimately detrimental to the game - while drama, personal and otherwise can be entertaining from a third party perspective and I can honestly say from experience that it rapidly becomes tiring and makes the game a lot less fun for those involved in it.

I also want to be careful not to slight my opponents when answering this question - I have little doubt that all would be active and engaged as President.

If Cincinnatus and I are fortunate enough to be elected, upon taking office we plan to engage with all the Senate - or, at least those that are willing to work with us - and try to pass a legislative agenda while listening to input and ideas from our ideological opponents. I don't expect this to be easy - we support, for example, federal economic stimulus spending on infrastructure, and a progressive graduate tax system for college fees, and other ideas that may not be palatable to the more right-leaning members of the Senate. But I think in having those debates, and those fights, we can make Atlasia are more interesting, and inclusive place - I have no interest in attempting to crudely steamroll my agenda through an unresponsive Senate. That path leads to gridlock and apathy.

Throughout my time, I've seen Presidents come and go, and the one thing I've learned from great Presidents like Purple State, Tmth and Polnut, is that the key to a successful, active and, yes, above all interesting Presidency is not dogmatically trying to impose your agenda on the nation, but in suggesting ideas, listening, and, when need be compromising.

When the President appears unresponsive or inconsiderate of popular or congressional opinion, people feel increasingly isolated from the Presidency, and it becomes a distant, almost irrelevant office. That's something I am set on avoiding.

We can't reach a compromise on everything, nor should we, and we certainly can't reach consensus on everything - the game would be incredibly boring if we did! But an Atlasia where instead of bitter, partisan divides we have a civilized debate on where we want to as a nation, is, I believe, the best way to ensure an engaged and active administration.

[Oakvale]

I support the right of every internet user to migrate to uselectionatlas.org.

^ I support this. Dave Leip's US Election Atlas should have open borders. As for the "in-character" stuff...

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 certainly think that an equivalent to the fictional country of the "United States"' DREAM Act is a no-brainer as far as immigration goes - deporting kids who are, for all intents and purposes, Atlasians based on what's effectively a legal technicality is downright barbaric.

There's a strain of thought that thinks of illegal immigrants as criminals - nothing more - who should be arrested and deported immediately, and good riddance. I can understand that attitude on some level - obviously we can't have open borders, and we shouldn't simply ignore illegal immigration - it is a problem. But any realistic immigration policy has to be limited - mass deportations are a clumsy, crude and inhumane excuse for a solution - and, first and foremost, compassionate.

Illegal immigrants are, in the vast majority, not hardened criminals. They're just people trying to make a better life for themselves in Atlasia. We can't turn a blind eye to illegal immigration, but the just thing to do is to provide those illegal immigrants who work hard and don't have a criminal record with a path to citizenship. The alternative is to cruelly break apart families - children from parents and husbands from wives. That's not something we should be doing, and as President I'll strive to reach a compassionate, sensible solution to give our illegal immigrants a way to become full citizens of the nation they love.

[Oakvale]

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

As I said earlier, I think gradual reductions in spending - in certain areas - and, if necessary, gradual increases in revenues is the sensible path to a balanced budget. Cutting too much too quickly, especially from programs that are essential to helping those less fortunate, would inflict a form of violent trauma on not just the people but the economy as a whole. I'm fairly traditional on this - in an economic crisis, you have to spend to keep the economy afloat; when times are good you can cut back and work on the deficit issue.

I would not back a Balanced Budget Amendment.