AF Primaries: Illinois Primary (Deadline Monday 11th 6pm EST)

[Josh/Devilman88]

Hey Joe, can you ask Alcon to sticky the threads?

[Joe Republic]

Hey Joe, can you ask Alcon to sticky the threads?

Already done.  We just have to wait.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Hey Joe, can you ask Alcon to sticky the threads?

Already done.  We just have to wait.

OK, thanks!

[Akno21]

Ad (750k)

Alexander Bernstein has a record of service to this country. During his term as Secretary of State,

*Picture of Bernstein shaking hands with formally dressed men and women

He developed working relationships with representatives from all over the world.

*Picture of Bernstein with Middle Eastern leaders

He presided over some of the most successful Israeli-Palestinian peace talks in history.

*Picture of Bernstein with North Korean leaders

He worked out a deal with North Korea regarding its nuclear program

*Picture of Bernstein at Congress

He operated in a bi-partisan manner with support from both parties.

Cut to Bernstein standing in front of State Fair

As the partisan bickering in Washington grows greater every day, the need for a leader who can reach across party lines and get things done becomes ever clearer. I've brought people together across the world, and I can do it here at home too.

I'm Alexander Bernstein, and I approve this message.

[12th Doctor]

Speech 1: Energy
   America faces many problems today, but that is nothing new.  Each generation has its own challenges to face, but those challenges have always been met by America with strength and determination.  Our own challenges are ready to be faced, and we must confront them, not cower behind walls of our own making.
   Our energy policy is one such problem.  Our addiction to petroleum affects our economy, our environment, and our foreign affairs.  We expend large amounts of money to acquire petroleum overseas, not just in direct purchases, but in the provision of military and other types of foreign assistance intended to safeguard our oil suppliers.  Consumption of fossil fuels also causes unwanted emissions that harm our environment.  We need to confront the dragon of petroleum and slay it.
   Biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel are helpful and their production should be encouraged.  CAFE standards must be strengthened and combined with a program to encourage the removal of older, inefficient vehicles from the road.  But these conservative measures, while needed, are only short term solutions to curb, not long term solutions to cure our petroleum addiction.  We need to aggressively research replacements for the internal combustion engine.
   Improved battery technology has already made possible $100,000 electric sports cars with comparable performance to conventional vehicles in the same price range, but if we could do the same with a $20,000 family car, we could utilize our electricity grid to generate and distribute the energy we need for transportation without recourse to petroleum or leaky pipelines.  Hydrogen fuel cells are another possibility to achieve the same ends, but will require the development of a number of different technologies to make practical a hydrogen economy.
   However, whether it be improved batteries, fuel cells, or some other technology, replacing petroleum will require increased production of electricity.  If that production comes from increased consumption of fossil fuels, we will only have achieved the replacement of the problem of petroleum with another.  We should do all that can be done to increase the use of wind power and other renewable sources of electricity; we should research practical methods of carbon sequestration; but we must be prepared to make use of the one proven, existing means of electricity production that both has no carbon impact in generation, and is easily scalable up in size to not only meet the demands for new generating capacity, but to retire existing fossil fuel powered generators, and that is nuclear power.
   Our fears of nuclear power, while not entirely unjustified, have been overhyped by fear mongers who ignore the dangers of the alternatives.  More environmental damage is caused by fossil fuels than by nuclear power, yet it is nuclear power that attracts the focus of a number of supposed environmental activists.  This no doubt because of the human tendency to worry more about new risks, even when than they are lower than the old risks that already exist.  To the extent that renewable supplies of electricity can be utilized, they should, but given a choice between nuclear and fossil fuels to supply the remainder of our demand, we should be doing all we can to utilize nuclear.

Guess you didn't see the rule against long speeches.

[bullmoose88]

Guess you didn't see the rule against long speeches.
[/quote]

(OOC: Geez man, chill. I'm sure Joe knows what exceeds the limit, and what does not.)

[12th Doctor]

Guess you didn't see the rule against long speeches.

(OOC: Geez man, chill. I'm sure Joe knows what exceeds the limit, and what does not.)
[/quote]

You obviously didn't see when Ernest criticized me for calling it a Primary and not a caucus... it is just a bit of friendly back and forth.

[Joe Republic]

It's ok, there isn't really a 'rule' about long speeches.  It's just strongly recommended that you stick to a single paragraph, for two reasons.  One, I don't like reading lengthy tracts, and two, for similar reasons, they'll deduct from the quality of the speech and thus reduce its effect.

[Josh/Devilman88]

What time will be you closing it tomorrow?

[Joe Republic]

What time will be you closing it tomorrow?

Hmm, let's say... 4pm EST.

[Josh/Devilman88]

What time will be you closing it tomorrow?

Hmm, let's say... 4pm EST.

Can't wait!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's ok, there isn't really a 'rule' about long speeches.  It's just strongly recommended that you stick to a single paragraph, for two reasons.  One, I don't like reading lengthy tracts, and two, for similar reasons, they'll deduct from the quality of the speech and thus reduce its effect.

I stuck to a single topic, and a 3-minute speech is hardly long in my opinion.    I'm keeping the one paragraph sound bites for the ads.  Besides, I'm using the same formula for all of my speeches.  The first paragraph will be the same and contains the overall theme of my campaign.  The second summarizes the topic and the rest goes into slightly wonkish details.  I'm hardly going into Clintonesque excess here folks.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Speech 2: Military
   America faces many problems today, but that is nothing new.  Each generation has its own challenges to face, but those challenges have always been met by America with strength and determination.  Our own challenges are ready to be faced, and we must confront them, not cower behind walls of our own making.
   When it comes to military planning, despite the obvious failures of the Rumsfeld doctrine, the current administration refuses to acknowledge the elephant in the room, a fault no Republican should ever make.  That elephant is what changes do we need to make to avoid repeating the mistake of trying to occupy a country with insufficient force?  The pacifist solution of not making the attempt in the first place assumes wrongly that we can stay safe by burying our heads in the sand.  While war should always be the last option in diplomacy, that doesn't mean that it is not an option.  We need a military capable of applying force as needed.  We must not become so obsessed with Iraq that we fail to plan and prepare for future conflicts.
   The tragic flaw of the Rumsfeld doctrine is not its basic premises; it's failures have come from its application beyond the scope of the concerns it was developed to address.  We do not need a massive military force to fight a conventional war.  The cold war is over and the doctrine and equipment our military possesses is more than enough to deal with any conventional threat that they may face.  However, we do need sufficient personnel available to enable us to deal with the occasional need to fight or better yet, to prevent, an insurgency such as is going on in Iraq.
   That is why it is so painful to see the mistakes being made by the administration in the care and nurturing of our National Guard and Reserves.  Treating them as integral components of the Regular forces has been an inane attempt at cost-cutting that has seriously weakened our national defense.  Our Regular forces must be strong enough to deal with any conventional war they are called upon to handle, with the National Guard and Reserves called upon to serve in situations such as Iraq in the aftermath of Saddam, and strong enough to apply sufficient strength in the first instance that they need not be called upon to repeatedly uproot their lives and fortunes.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

My speeches will be up tomorrow

[MaC]

Level 1 Organization

75 hours campaigning

200 hours fundraising

no advertisements

One speech on abortion-I will have up shortly.

Okay Joe, now that I spent 275 hours campaigning.  2000-275=1725, so does that mean that 1725 hours I have left + 60 hours until NH after the Iowa caucus will give me 1785 to work with NH and the rest?

[Joe Republic]

Okay Joe, now that I spent 275 hours campaigning.  2000-275=1725, so does that mean that 1725 hours I have left + 60 hours until NH after the Iowa caucus will give me 1785 to work with NH and the rest?

Exactly, but two things.  Because of that speech you gave (2 hours), you have 1723 hours remaining.  And while you're correct about it bumping up by 60 hours ahead of NH, you'll also get more additional time for each primary stop after that.

[bullmoose88]

Can we start getting preliminary polls for NH, and the primaries soon after (it would help greatly with time budgeting)

[bullmoose88]

Speech-Iowa (Choice and Vision)
(Sioux City)

[Arage stands in a park in near or at the city/town center]

"I just want to talk to my fellow Republicans here in Iowa before they caucus this afternoon to give me their support.

I understand that your choice is difficult. There are so many fine people to choose from...after all, we ARE all Republicans (Crowd Laughs). But...

I feel that I am your best option and that my vision for our party, and our country is what makes me stand out from my collegues.

My experience as governor and the fact that I am not tainted by Washington bureacracy allows me to serve you as your president by being an efficient chief executive without connections to entrenched special interests.

My vision is one of freedom and empowerment. I want to restore political power back in the hands of ordinary people by reducing burdensome federal 'we know whats right for you' decision making. At the same time, I will reform the role of the government to empower people to improve themselves, their families, and their communities. Give you the tools, and I know you'll finish the job, and better than DC can.

I hope you'll choose freedom and choose me Thank You and God Bless."

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I'm going to add another 100 hours of Iowa campaigning and bump the ad up from a Level 1 ad to a Level 2 ad.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Speech One...

The first thing that you must understand about my campaign is that it is, fundamentally, a campaign based around my values, your values, our values. Most politicians these days seem to believe that the basic unit in our society is the individual. These politicians preach a gospel of greed and selfishness; no wonder they are all so corrupt. I do not. I understand, as you ordinary folks all understand as well, that the basic units in our society are our communities and families. Most candidates claim to be in favour of "family values"; yet how can they support family values when they also support, and are given a lot of money by, the corporations that are destroying family farms, that lay off good, hardworking blue collar folks by the thousand and ruining the environment of God's green Earth to satisfy their own greed? They can't can they? The Establishment needs to be taught a lesson doesn't it?

Speech Two...

It's become something of a cliche that candidates of the Establishment turn up in Iowa every four years and talk a load of innacurate drivel about a subject which they don't understand, namely agriculture.
They make all sorts of claims about how they are going to save the family farm (although they never say how) and they frequently show almost laughable ignorance as to how agrinomics and agriculture actually work. Frankly most of them wouldn't know what a cow was if it hit 'em in the face, and I doubt most of them know what different crops are actually grown for.
I, on the otherhand, do understand a bit about agriculture. I grew up in a rural area and have many friends and relatives employed in agriculture. It means something to me on a personal level and if I am elected President I will put agriculture at the heart of my agenda... starting with a radical reform of subsidies and hopefully finishing off with land reform. I intend to redistribute money, land, everything, from agribusiness to the family farmer. I want rural America to prosper again; and I will work night and day to reach that goal.

Some more speeches may be on the way shortly...

---
I'd like an extra 100 hours campaigning in Iowa please.

[bullmoose88]

Tack on another 148 campaign hours for me please.

[Joe Republic]

Just under an hour and a half left, everybody.

[Josh/Devilman88]

YAY!!!!! Are you going to do a county map?

[bullmoose88]

Or TV network style presentation?

[Joe Republic]

YAY!!!!! Are you going to do a county map?

I wish!  No, I don't really have the time, resources, or in-depth knowledge of each of Iowa's counties to do that.  Sorry!

Or TV network style presentation?

I wasn't really planning on it.  There will be some limited analysis of each campaign, though.