The Real Life Forums Mock Presidential Election

[StruckingFuggle]

I've decided to actually throw my hat in the ring ... I'll type up a party platform once its solidified, but it will mostly follow the points I tend to argue. Furthermore, I'd like to extend an invitation to Azurain to be my running mate.

(Since it might be a small conflict of interest, is anyone - Martin? - interested in not running but taking over the administration of this whole thing?)

[NorthernComfort]

Obviously Martin or somebody with a bit of authority would be a better pick, but I wouldn't mind working on getting the election together.

[Rembrandt Q. Einstein]

Rembrandt Q. Einstein's "As Yet Unnamed Platform" or, "AYUP"

I'm proposing a mix of personal responsibility with several socialist tweaks, I know it sounds like it doesn't make sense, and my general philosophies will probably contradict each other on basic levels, but bear with me. Basically, necessities should be provided for everyone by the government, but luxuries are solely the responsibility of private citizens.

It's not everyone's job to care for everyone else, but it is the government’s job, and it's your job to help the government.

Specific Issues:

Abortion: Women are free do choose based on their own morals, the government does not have the right to step in and affect their choice. Scientific research is needed to determine a point where a fertilized egg becomes a human being (in my opinion it would be the point where thoughts begin (also, I'm not exactly sure whether or not this has exactly been determined either, all I know is that abortion is only allowed in the first Trimester, but I would push for a more exact timeframe))

Marijuana: Marijuana should be restricted the same way alcohol is (i.e. driving and age limits) they would be government taxed, and said taxes would be passed on to agencies helping drug recovery programs, detox clinics, and excess would be passed on to other government agencies as needed.

Other Drugs: "Harder" drugs such as cocaine, heroin, LSD, etc. Would be heavily restricted, and penalties for drug possession would be increased, however, mere possession would incur involvement in government detox clinics/drug recovery programs instead of jailtime. Possession with the intent of sales would incur both

Social Security: Because of cost concerns, Social Security will be lessened gradually, so as not to screw over those counting on them at the moment. Hopefully it can eventually be phased out in exchange for a program that will provide food, shelter, and necessary medication for poverty stricken elderly citizens, rather than providing money for everyone.

Welfare: Welfare should be restricted to a maximum length. It is intended as a standby until another job can be acquired, not a government supplied living stipend for the unemployed.

Tax reform: Taxes need to be streamlined. First and foremost they should providing education, defense, environmental protection, and some social programs. I would propose increases on non-income taxes, specifically luxury taxes, (What I mean by this is a sort of bracketed sales tax system that is government set, so that expensive items incur larger and larger taxes, while necessities have none, plus it cannot be circumvented by buying out of state), and a weighted/bracketed system akin to what we have now, except I would make it more top-heavy. Taxes would probably be relatively high (I'm not an economist, so I shouldn't try and give figures )

Gun Control: All guns need to be licensed, and possession of unlicensed firearms would be heavily enforced. People are free to do what they like, but if it leads to crime the government should do everything it can to control it. Most likely Assault weapons would be banned with only extenuating circumstances allowing them into the possession of private citizens. (I understand people like to hunt, and a handgun in their home makes them feel safe...but I doubt you need an M-16 to take down a buck or scare away an intruder)

Foreign affairs: All precautions should be taken to make sure that the UN, EU, and other countries support any international decisions, I' like to keep the world as happy with our international affairs as possible. The only extenuating circumstance is if the lives of Americans are in direct danger, and then action should be limited to stopping that immediate threat and nothing more without approval.

That’s all for now, feel free to ask either here or via PM on anything else and I'll do my best to provide an answer.

PS: Everybody's birthday present to me can be voting for me, since my birthday is Nov. 2nd gogo unrelated matter of luck and coincidence, propel me to victory, and beyond!

[Imperator Severn]

I either agree with or don't much care about your other issues, so I'll not try to reply.

Gun Control: All guns need to be licensed, and possession of unlicensed firearms would be heavily enforced. People are free to do what they like, but if it leads to crime the government should do everything it can to control it. Most likely Assault weapons would be banned with only extenuating circumstances allowing them into the possession of private citizens. (I understand people like to hunt, and a handgun in their home makes them feel safe...but I doubt you need an M-16 to take down a buck or scare away an intruder)

The purpose of ensuring that the populace is armed is not so that people can hunt, or even kill criminals (not that either of these are bad things.) People must be allowed to arm themselves in order that they can challenge the military. A standing army is a standing threat to the liberties of a nation, but is unavoidable in the modern world. The second best thing is to ensure that the government does not hold a monopoly of force. If the citizenry is armed, it can fight back if need be. War is always preferable to slavery. Even if it means people get killed, I fully support the right of free people to form private armies with assault weapons, mortars, flamethrowers, jet fighters, what have you.

Foreign affairs: All precautions should be taken to make sure that the UN, EU, and other countries support any international decisions, I' like to keep the world as happy with our international affairs as possible. The only extenuating circumstance is if the lives of Americans are in direct danger, and then action should be limited to stopping that immediate threat and nothing more without approval.

I say fuck them. Do what is right, not what is popular. If other countries don't agree with what the US decides to do, that is not our concern. The opinion of US citizens should be taken into account, but should not be considered necessarily binding.

[randomperson2]

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Rembrandt Q. Einstein's "As
Specific Issues:

Abortion: Women are free do choose based on their own morals, the government does not have the right to step in and affect their choice.[/quote]

I agree but for different reasons. which are not material to the argument at hand.

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Marijuana: Marijuana should be restricted the same way alcohol is.[/quote]

I just said this, so I obviously agree.

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Welfare: Welfare should be restricted to a maximum length. It is intended as a standby until another job can be acquired, not a government supplied living stipend for the unemployed. [/quote]

You are describing unemployment not welfare.

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Tax reform: Taxes need to be streamlined. First and foremost they should providing education, defense, environmental protection, and some social programs. I would propose increases on non-income taxes, specifically luxury taxes, (What I mean by this is a sort of bracketed sales tax system that is government set, so that expensive items incur larger and larger taxes, while necessities have none, plus it cannot be circumvented by buying out of state), and a weighted/bracketed system akin to what we have now, except I would make it more top-heavy. Taxes would probably be relatively high (I'm not an economist, so I shouldn't try and give figures )[/quote]

While I'm not advocating raising taxes or tax cuts for the wealthy, in the bearish economy we are currently in it would not be wise to impose greater capitol gains tax, which it seems to me to be what you are proposing

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Gun Control: All guns need to be licensed, and possession of unlicensed firearms would be heavily enforced. People are free to do what they like, but if it leads to crime the government should do everything it can to control it. Most likely Assault weapons would be banned with only extenuating circumstances allowing them into the possession of private citizens. (I understand people like to hunt, and a handgun in their home makes them feel safe...but I doubt you need an M-16 to take down a buck or scare away an intruder) [/quote]
Way to be an unflinching defender of the status quo

[quote="Rembrandt Q. Einstein";p="388349"]Foreign affairs: All precautions should be taken to make sure that the UN, EU, and other countries support any international decisions, I' like to keep the world as happy with our international affairs as possible. The only extenuating circumstance is if the lives of Americans are in direct danger, and then action should be limited to stopping that immediate threat and nothing more without approval.[/quote]

Thank god finally something I can argue with you about. ^^ Fuck the UN and Fuck the EU. See that’s the point the liberals are solid gone, meh, wouldn't have liked me anyway. But seriously, The point the US has to clear any international action with foreign powers national sovereignty goes out the window. My plan really functions like an endearing parent. They need international peace keepers, or help funding international humanitarian aid, we are there, but we don’t ask them for permission to do that which we deem necessary to the survival of our nation, or our way of life.

Now for Imperator Severn got to tell you it takes balls to propose a democratically elected dictatorship. if I’m elected how bout a joint chief job?

[Rfairney]

If the M16 doesnt scare people off NOTHING will

you dont seem to like international things much
the US doesnt have to clear ANY international action, only major things such as STARTING A WAR WITH THE WRONG ENEMY, The UN does not prevent people taking defensive action to ensure survival, but ONE country, with NO weapons of decent range is NOT a threat to the survival of america

[Salvation122]

Sal's Stance

On Energy:
Take federal funds dedicated towards alternative energy and repurpose them to the research and implementation of thermodepolymerization. Thermodepolymerization is a process which turns any carbon-based waste, including agricultural byproducts, all non-metal trash, and sewage, into Texas Light Sweet Crude Oil, water, and minerals. Using agricultural byproducts alone, operating at full capacity with the current understanding of this technology, the United States could create forty billion barrels of oil a year, completely ending our dependence on foreign oil. Expanded to include all waste, the US could join OPEC and rival any nation in the mideast for oil production save Saudi Arabia. Since this process produces crude oil, it can then be processed into heating oil or gasoline and would require no retooling in either gas stations or engines to use. We will end the energy crisis and halt ecological damage done by landfills in one fell swoop.

Additionally, I favor improving the nation's electrical infrastructure through expansion of nuclear power. New reactor designs allow nuclear waste to be used as fuel until the material is entirely spent, making nuclear waste not only a non-issue but providing extremely cheap fuel in the form of previous nuclear waste. These designs are also physically incapable of melting down and emit only steam, making nuclear energy completely safe, cheap, and environmentally friendly. Any excess energy may be sold to neighboring nations at a profit.

On Social Security and Taxes:
I favor a drastic simplification of the tax code and nearly halving payroll taxes (dependent on your income level and age.) Under my proposed plan, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, and the EITC would be ended in five years. The taxes used to support them would be nullified.

Some people are dependant on these programs, and I acknowledge that. In their place, the government will support private charities performing the same job through the following means: every dollar given to approved charities acts as an income tax credit, up to half of a person's income taxes. Every dollar you give to an approved charity is a dollar less you give to the government. This allows you to put a large percentage of your tax dollars where you want them to go.

Income taxes will be raised by two percent across the board, but this is still a net tax cut. The deduction system will be vastly simplified - most deductions, under my plan, will become credits, and the deductions that remain will be simple, clear, concise, and right on your tax forms. In short, anyone with a fourth-grade education - anyone who can add, subtract, divide, and find a percentage - will be able to do their taxes without the aid of a CPA.

Additionally, the federal government will add a one percent sales tax to any consumer good with an MSRP over fifty dollars, with the exception of medical supplies. This tax is nonregressive - it does not affect the poor - will be largely invisible, and will be dedicated towards paying off the federal debt and supporting our military.

The income tax system for corporations and individuals will be identical. Only the scale will change. No more special benefits for large corporations.

[I have to go to class. More later.]

[Bigity]

I'm for a flat tax rate myself, but some interesting ideas indeed.

[Salvation122]

On Intelligence:
Under my proposed plan, the CIA, DIA, NSA, and investigative branch of the FBI would be rolled into one agency with one budget allocation, eliminating redundant bureaucracy and facillitating cooperation between all branches of our intelligence services. Policy would focus on achieving a balance between human and electronic intelligence, with a priority on boots on the ground.

On the Military:
My first action as President will be a complete audit of the Defense Department with an eye to removing projects, programs, organizations, and bureaucracy that is either outdated or unneeded. The focus of the military must remain solely on supporting the general infantry that ultimately decide a war. I aim to make the military more efficient and increase civilian oversight without being intrusive. Projects and organizations that do need additional funding will benefit from the savings elsewhere. I support reorganizing overseas troops and bases to areas with a greater strategic benefit in a post-Cold War world.

On the UN:
The United States will continue to act in what it believes to be its own best interest, regardless of the EU or UN. Compromise will be sought whenever possible, but we will not be beholden to the UN to act this way or that way. To do so is to relinquish our soveriegnty, and I cannot accept that.

On the Supreme Court:
The power of the Judiciary has grown far beyond what the authors of the Constitution intended. Indeed, Judicial Review is a power not granted to the Supreme Court in the Constitution, but one they essentially invented later. The will of the people of the United States should not be held to the political whims of nine men and women who are appointed, not elected. Unfortunately, there is no recourse against such decisions but ammending the Constitution or impeachment, both of which are usually inappropriate measures.

Therefore, I will support legislature up to and including an ammendment to the Constitution that gives Congress the power to reverse any ruling by the Supreme Court that directly contradicts or influences any legislature previously passed by the federal government and currently in law in the same manner as they may override a Presidential veto.

On Abortion:
There is no current federal legislation that compells states to permit abortions. Therefore, if I am elected, until such time that abortion is made legal by federal law, I will pardon any person charged for any crime related to withholding or refusing an abortion in a state whose lawmaking body disallows the practice.

This is not to say that abortion will be made illegal nationwide. In some places, it may be. It is a state issue and will be dealt with by the state legislatures.

On Education:
I will end the Department of Education. It costs taxpayers sixty billion dollars a year with absolutely no benefit to our children.

Education is a state and local issue, and should remain one. However, if elected, I would ask state Governors to look towards reducing unnecessary administrative costs and putting the money saved into whatever measures he feels would benefit his state's education system.

On Gay Marriage:
Marriage law is a state issue. I will veto any legislation that attempts to define marriage at the federal level, one way or the other.

I would, however, ask Congress and Governors to pass law requiring that government documents refer to the legal, state-involved processes of marriage as civil unions, regardless of gender, to sharpen the currently blurry line between marriage as a state institution and marriage as a religious practice.

On Campaign Finance Reform:
If elected, I will introduce legislation into Congress undoing the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act. McCain-Feingold is, without question, the single largest infringement of the Constitutional rights of American citizens in the history of our nation. Additionally, I will issue a Presidential pardon to anyone found to be in violation of this law, including my opponents.

[I think I've covered everything I wanted to. If there's something you want my stance on, don't be afraid to ask.]

[Bigity]

Intelligence:
I don't know, I like the FBI and CIA being seperate. For one, I don't think an agency should be handling domestic, criminal cases as well as international, intelligence related matters. Plus, sometimes having a little redundency is a good thing, to help things from slipping through the cracks. I do think the intel community could use a little tightening up though.

On the Military:

The DoD does a pretty good job on axing projects that aren't of any tactical or strategic worth. Depending on what you mean with oversight, I might or might not agree. The U.S. military is the best trained and best equiped military in the world. Let them decide how to kill people and break things.

On the UN:
The U.N. is pretty useless anyway, and the powers of the world will never let it become all that much more powerful anyways. Maybe having a forum to voice complaints is worth all the money the U.N. spends, but I'm not sure. If it stuck to plain old humanitarian things, I'd be a lot more supporting of the U.N.

On the Supreme Court:
Agreed, the judges of all courts are required to uphold the law, not to change it or make it fit certain politically correct or popular feelings.

I am however, against any powers of the legislative branch to change Supreme Court rulings. That is too much a fly in the face of the seperation of powers for me.

On Abortion:
Since this issue is not a matter of the federal government, the states should indeed be making laws according to the will of its citizens, along with such issues as gay marriage, pet marriage, smoking, and the like.

[ajaxrynu]

A standing army is a standing threat to the liberties of a nation, but is unavoidable in the modern world.

I feel insulted. Why do people always seem to forget that the military is made up of citizens willing to die for liberties of the rest? We are people too you know...

[Imperator Severn]

Way to be an unflinching defender of the status quo

If he's happy with how things are, then what's the problem? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I feel insulted. Why do people always seem to forget that the military is made up of citizens willing to die for liberties of the rest? We are people too you know...

I'm a PFC in the Aggie Corps of Cadets seeking a commission as a Marine officer. I have nothing but respect for the military. I also have read a great deal of history. Standing armies are dangerous, and must be controled.

Intelligence:
I don't know, I like the FBI and CIA being seperate. For one, I don't think an agency should be handling domestic, criminal cases as well as international, intelligence related matters. Plus, sometimes having a little redundency is a good thing, to help things from slipping through the cracks. I do think the intel community could use a little tightening up though.

More importantly in my opinion, having multiple agencies helps keep them honest. I'd hate to have one appointed (read: not accountable to the populace) figure in control of such a potentially powerful agency.

the US doesnt have to clear ANY international action, only major things such as STARTING A WAR WITH THE WRONG ENEMY, The UN does not prevent people taking defensive action to ensure survival, but ONE country, with NO weapons of decent range is NOT a threat to the survival of america

I agree, Iraq was in no danger of conquering us. But Saddam was a tyrant, and therefore he needed to be stopped. If the current administration had the amount of intestinal fortitude I would, we would be invading a half-dozen african and Asian nations to set up western democracy all across the world. Freedom is not a matter of taste, it is an indispensible part of being a human being.

[ajaxrynu]

I agree that a standing army left to its own devices could be a threat to a country, especially if left under the control of corrupt Generals and Admirals. During my time in service every High ranking official I have spoken with has had a great deal of moral character. Granted some of the ideas they come up with are exceptionally stupid, but none of them would try to seize control...

---

Besides, if one DID try to take over and rule the country, they wouldn't get far. I will only follow orders from a superior that doesn't conflict with my moral compass. Heck, that's one of the first things they teach you about following orders. We have minds, and the AF encourages us to use them. If an order is wrong and you know it, don't follow it.

---

Also, that covers the Active Forces, the Reserves and National Guard fall under the control of the Individual Governers of the State that they are assigned to.

---

Sorry, I think I got a bit hot under the collar...

[Deacon]

Heh...the Air Force.

[Phong]

[quote="Deacon";p="388845"]Heh...the Air Farce.[/quote]

Fixed