The Official 2008 SuperHeroHype.com Presidential Election!

Thank yuu for stating the obvious but need I remind you that pointing out what they want is not offering a solution.

Where have I only listed the problems without offering at least general solutions? I am making a vow this election year to not only discuss what's wrong with America, but to offer ways to fix the many problems which has crippled this country in recent years.

We have a responsibility as leaders to guide America forward by not only telling the American people that we hear their cries for help, but by extending our arms and offering a helping hand to the Americans who are suffering the most.

I have currently offered my in depth plan to help ease gas prices in America, while striving for energy independence. I have also informed voters what I will do during my first day in office.

Now, the question remains, what will you do to solve America's problems? :huh:
 
Matt this is gonna be tough to keep in thread...perhaps each candidate should make their own. Keeping track of everything will be nuts.

Anyways, now that I have some time, I'll tackle the first issue on my agenda which will go in this order:

1. Energy
2. Environment
3. Economiy
4. War in Iraq
5. Education
6. Foreign Policy
7. Homeland Security
8. Immigration
9. Technology
10. Space Programs

So...the 1st one of the day is New Energy. Under my administration, there would be a new government program ala Nasa called "National Energy Agency". Here, at NEA, you would have the world's brightest working around the clock to find new forms of energy. Nuclear energy, cellulosic ethonal, and many others would be expanded and researched. With a standard 35% requirement of renewable energy and 100% requirement of clean energy, NEA woudl certainly be an extremely useful program for the country. The top priority of NEA would be to find a suitable subsitute for gasoline in already existing cars.

Oil itself will not go down in value. I would have us join China on the Gulf of Mexico and in the fields of the northern United States. NEA would be in charge of finding the wells, preserving any wild life, and the clean up. However, we do not need to increase our supply of oil as much we need to decrease our dependency on it. That said, the more oil the better. We would drill for our own oil initially to stockpile and or sell overseas for profits.

Thanks to NEA, the United States would be leading the world into a more energy efficent future.
 
As President, I will combine the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior into the Department of Environmental Resources. This department will be in charge of regulating our national parks and U.S. environmental policies.
 
Aren't we supposed to start campaigning tommorrow not today?
 
Aren't we supposed to start campaigning tommorrow not today?

You know how presidential campaigns are these days... they always start well ahead of schedule, even though it annoys people/ goes against pre-determined rules...

Besides, I thought today was the 10th, until you pointed out that it wasn't.
 
Well since we're on the environment

Hippie Hunter on the Environment
- As President of the United States I would make the Environmental Protection Agency a Cabinet level department known as the Department of Environmental Protection.

- The emission standards for automobiles in this nation are downright pathetic and embarrassing. As president I would submit legislation to Congress to increase emission standards to the emission standards of Euro 6 by 2018.

- I will not submit the Kyoto Protocol for ratification in the Senate. While the ideals of the Kyoto Protocol are indeed noble, the treaty itself is horribly flawed. Nations such as Russia have the opportunity to simply profit off the treaty. Nations such as China are given special exemptions from the treaty. The only nation that would have to take any serious actions would be the United States and is designed to where nations like Venezuela, Syria, Iran, North Korea and others can use it to try and punish the United States under the guise of environmentalism. Not only that but the treaty is subject to be expired and replaced by 2012 and the Senate already turned down the treaty before President Bill Clinton submitted it to Congress.

- Instead of submitting the Kyoto Protocol for ratification, I will submit legislation to implement the ideals and goals of the Kyoto Protocol within a realistic time frame for the United States and without worries of other nations abusing it to punish the United States.

- I will pressure China to step up its efforts to help preserve the environment and combat the dangers of climate change.
 
No kyoto from Excel either.
 
No kyoto from Excel either.

Why not? The Kyoto Protocol would help reduce carbon emissions by forcing corporations to take responsibility for their environmental crimes. By signing this into law, we would limit greenhouse gas emissions and protect our environment from further harm.
 
Can canadiens come in?

Were the smarter ones of North America....No offense....



:o
 
Hippie Hunter's Energy Policy
We are now living in a day and age where gasoline now costs over $4.00 per gallon and a barrel of oil is likely to reach $150.00. Our economy is on the verge of a recession due to the high costs of oil and our addictive dependency on it. The costs of transportation, just to get to work are demanding to the people. The costs of transportation is increasing the costs of goods that everyday Americans need such as food. The costs of transportation are increasing the costs of labor to where small business owners must raise their prices just to stay profitable. And these rises in costs can all attribute to the unecessarily high cost of gasoline.

As President I would:

- Begin a thorough investigation on the oil corporations to determine whether or not price gouging is occuring. It's rather sickening to see that ExxonMobile make over $400 billion in revenue and make over $40 billion in income. It is sickening to see a prince of Saudi Arabia purchase a diamond studded car. If such price gouging is occuring I will force them to lower their prices and they will be punished accordingly.

- While I am opposed to price caps, I would apply heavy pressure on the oil corporations to lower their prices (as evident by their profits, they can afford it) and would consider to subsidize and lower taxes on gasoline to help ease the pressure of everyday Americans by lowering gas prices. I will also end policies which contribute to higher energy costs such as tariffs on ethanol, temporarily stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to ease demand, and more.

- As President, the government will invest in new energy technologies such as nuclear power while discovering a way to safely dispose of the wastes and renewable energy sources such as hydro, solar, and wind. I will create a Manhattan Project for new energy sources and offer an X-Prize to companies and individuals who develop new energy technologies.

- In order to obtain a more sustainable energy policy, we must ease our dependence on foreign oil, particularly that of the Middle East.
 
Hippie and I agree again. I am not a fan of price caps; that is imo a bit too much interference. We need to find ways to naturally bring it. It would be better for the long run.

Why not? The Kyoto Protocol would help reduce carbon emissions by forcing corporations to take responsibility for their environmental crimes. By signing this into law, we would limit greenhouse gas emissions and protect our environment from further harm.

Personally I think we could and need to do better; we're the biggest emitter in the world. We need something stronger; though if something wasn't devleoped soon then joing the other countries by using Kyoto would be the only real option.
 
Says the person who can't spell "Canadian." :o
:cmad:

i've lived in 3 different provinces. Quebec, Ontario, Alberta....They pronounce it differently there.....you know? yeesh :o.
Mee better interview them in debates.
 
Hippie and I agree again. I am not a fan of price caps; that is imo a bit too much interference. We need to find ways to naturally bring it. It would be better for the long run.

The only way to temporarily ease the burden on our middle class is to cap gas prices at a set price, while searching for alternative energy solutions. That is what FEGA would do.

The American people want gas prices to go down and they want them to go down immediately. They don't want to wait five to ten years while we sit around, formulating a long term solution to this long term problem. And we can't sit around, hoping it will magically decrease, when economists believe it will reach as much as $7 within the next year.

Personally I think we could and need to do better; we're the biggest emitter in the world. We need something stronger; though if something wasn't devleoped soon then joing the other countries by using Kyoto would be the only real option.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying you're for the Kyoto Protocol but you're really against it? Or are you saying you're against the Kyoto Protocol but you're secretly for it? :huh:

Are you trying to have it both ways?

Better yet-- what would you do differently than the Kyoto Protocol? Which solutions are you prepared to offer?
 
The only way to temporarily ease the burden on our middle class is to cap gas prices at a set price, while searching for alternative energy solutions. That is what FEGA would do.

The American people want gas prices to go down and they want them to go down immediately. They don't want to wait five to ten years while we sit around, formulating a long term solution to this long term problem. And we can't sit around, hoping it will magically decrease, when economists believe it will reach as much as $7 within the next year.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying you're for the Kyoto Protocol but you're really against it? Or are you saying you're against the Kyoto Protocol but you're secretly for it? :huh:

Are you trying to have it both ways?

Better yet-- what would you do differently than the Kyoto Protocol? Which solutions are you prepared to offer?

Of course they want them to go down now, that is why I said we would begin drilling alongside China off the coast of Florida; hell Id even be open to Alaska.

HOWEVER, we don't want to be in here 4 years still talking about it. We need to steps to make sure this problems is PERMINENTLY put to rest, not just temporary pushed off for someone else to deal with, because that isnt a solution at all. PERMINENT solutions are ideas such as requiring every new car to be sold within the U.S. by 2014 to pass the NEA test to make sure they are energy and environmentally safe, or looking for renewable energy and ways to convert the old standard ways with new, safer ones. This is all stuff NEA would be all over 24/7.

Fega would not work. A cap on gas prices would be ridiculous. What about when inflation naturally pushes it over $3.50? Oil will always by a major resource in the world, you still need to think about the companies. We cannot directly change that. It is our job to try to set the circumstances so they will naturally just go down on their own which is what would certainly happen if we would start drilling on our own land and stop buying; interfering would have unseen consequences we cant risk on such a major industry.

If we drill for our own oil, prices will drop on their own.

The Kyoto Protocols biggest problem is it does not deal with the amount of emissions that are within the atmosphere, which is what most sicentists claim is the real problem. For the amount of work it requires, the rewards are not suffieicent. 7% cut in overall emissions. There has to be a more effective way to cut emmissions in our country, but pulling a Bush and letting companies voluntarily do it is NOT going to fly in my administartion.
 
:cmad:

i've lived in 3 different provinces. Quebec, Ontario, Alberta....They pronounce it differently there.....you know? yeesh :o.
Mee better interview them in debates.

Even though they pronounce it differently, it's still spelled the same.

Massachusettsians pronounce "chowder" as "chow-da," Southerners pronounce "terror" as "terra," and many Jews pronounce words such as "huge" and "Hubert" without the "h" sound. Still doesn't change the spelling of the original word...
 
Matt,

Is the voting for this election restricted only to members of this forum, or will the Hype General Populace be invited to vote as well? If the latter is the case, some serious politicking will be conducted via PM I'd assume.
 
Matt,

Is the voting for this election restricted only to members of this forum, or will the Hype General Populace be invited to vote as well? If the latter is the case, some serious politicking will be conducted via PM I'd assume.

Of course :up:
 
Of course they want them to go down now, that is why I said we would begin drilling alongside China off the coast of Florida; hell Id even be open to Alaska.

HOWEVER, we don't want to be in here 4 years still talking about it. We need to steps to make sure this problems is PERMINENTLY put to rest, not just temporary pushed off for someone else to deal with, because that isnt a solution at all. PERMINENT solutions are ideas such as requiring every new car to be sold within the U.S. by 2014 to pass the NEA test to make sure they are energy and environmentally safe, or looking for renewable energy and ways to convert the old standard ways with new, safer ones. This is all stuff NEA would be all over 24/7.

FEGA would require car companies to produce cars which run on natural gas, hybrid technology, fuel cells, electricity and biomass. They would have to offer one model of each fuel type. For example, Ford could still offer the Escape Hybrid. But it would also have to offer something like a Focus Natural Gas model, a Fuel Cell Explorer, an electric Taurus and a Ranger which runs solely on biomass. FEGA would also require car companies to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy to 35 miles per gallon for SUVs/ Trucks and 45 miles per gallon for sedans and smaller vehicles. We would be increasing fuel efficiency while offering vehicles which run on alternative energy sources.

Fega would not work. A cap on gas prices would be ridiculous. What about when inflation naturally pushes it over $3.50? Oil will always by a major resource in the world, you still need to think about the companies. We cannot directly change that. It is our job to try to set the circumstances so they will naturally just go down on their own; interfering would have unseen consequences we cant risk on such a major industry.

So, basically, you don't care if the burden is lifted on the middle class?

Why does inflation matter? Our country went ten years without raising the minimum wage to coincide with inflation. Why can't the oil companies suffer a bit while we keep the price of gas at a steady $3.50 per gallon?

If the American people aren't spending extra money on gas, they will be more inclined to purchase more goods to help spur the economy. The difference in earnings from the oil companies will be made up in other areas. Meanwhile, this cap may cause oil companies to re-think their energy policies. And the government incentives which will help these companies explore alternative energies will also help them out in the long run.

Capping gas prices is not only a good idea, but it is the most sensible idea. It will help the middle class, and it will help cause the oil companies to re-evaluate how they treat their consumers.

If we drill for our own oil, prices will drop on their own.

How can you be so sure? The oil companies are the ones who control the price of oil. Not to mention, drilling for oil in Alaska will take time. It will take years to build a system which would help deliver the oil. Meanwhile, our middle class will still be forced to pay outrageous prices for oil, as we hope that drilling for oil domestically will help us.

No, the only way to help the middle class is to cap gas prices and guide the oil companies into exploring alternative energies.

The Kyoto Protocols biggest problem is it does not deal with the amount of emissions that are within the atmosphere, which is what most sicentists claim is the real problem. For the amount of work it requires, the rewards are not suffieicent. 7% cut in overall emissions. There has to be a more effective way to cut emmissions in our country, but pulling a Bush and letting companies voluntarily do it is NOT going to fly in my administartion.

There is no way you can realistically cut all emissions. We have to gradually cut emissions, otherwise we will be unable to sustain ourselves economically. That's why the Kyoto Protocol is important. It will help us get on a path to reducing carbon emissions significantly. But it will immediately reduce some of the most severe emissions throughout our country. There is no way we can reduce all emissions, but if we reduce some emissions, we will still be helping the environment-- however small a step it may be.
 
Matt,

Is the voting for this election restricted only to members of this forum, or will the Hype General Populace be invited to vote as well? If the latter is the case, some serious politicking will be conducted via PM I'd assume.

It will be open, but checks will be put into place to avoid it becoming a simple popularity contest, including our electoral college.
 
It will be open, but checks will be put into place to avoid it becoming a simple popularity contest, including our electoral college.

What the...explain? And what bout the idea each candidate gets theyre own thread; keep track of everything in one thread will be a ***** :o
 
What the...explain? And what bout the idea each candidate gets theyre own thread; keep track of everything in one thread will be a ***** :o

You can create campaign threads if you'd like and if you read the rules in the first post you would know what the electoral college is and what purpose it serves.
 
FEGA would require car companies to produce cars which run on natural gas, hybrid technology, fuel cells, electricity and biomass. They would have to offer one model of each fuel type. For example, Ford could still offer the Escape Hybrid. But it would also have to offer something like a Focus Natural Gas model, a Fuel Cell Explorer, an electric Taurus and a Ranger which runs solely on biomass. FEGA would also require car companies to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy to 35 miles per gallon for SUVs/ Trucks and 45 miles per gallon for sedans and smaller vehicles. We would be increasing fuel efficiency while offering vehicles which run on alternative energy sources.

That I agree sounds good when it comes to automobiles :up:

So, basically, you don't care if the burden is lifted on the middle class?

I am not going to get into this game with you. Thats not what I said. Of course I care that is lifted, but I don't want it to lifted so quickly and blindly that it comes back in 5 or 10 years.

Why does inflation matter? Our country went ten years without raising the minimum wage to coincide with inflation. Why can't the oil companies suffer a bit while we keep the price of gas at a steady $3.50 per gallon?

It is never good for anybody suffer, people or companys. The fact is that if we do what I believe we both want to do and thats drill for oil on our damn land and in the gulf, that wont matter because the prices will drop on their own. That would solve the gas price problem, but thats it.

If the American people aren't spending extra money on gas, they will be more inclined to purchase more goods to help spur the economy. The difference in earnings from the oil companies will be made up in other areas. Meanwhile, this cap may cause oil companies to re-think their energy policies. And the government incentives which will help these companies explore alternative energies will also help them out in the long run.

...

Capping gas prices is not only a good idea, but it is the most sensible idea. It will help the middle class, and it will help cause the oil companies to re-evaluate how they treat their consumers.

I don't understand why this matters. If we get our own oil from our own land, the prices will drop significantly.

How can you be so sure? The oil companies are the ones who control the price of oil. Not to mention, drilling for oil in Alaska will take time. It will take years to build a system which would help deliver the oil. Meanwhile, our middle class will still be forced to pay outrageous prices for oil, as we hope that drilling for oil domestically will help us.

Its supply and demand. Thats how I am sure. When we have a lot more oil, the prices will go down.

No, the only way to help the middle class is to cap gas prices and guide the oil companies into exploring alternative energies.

Cap oil prices is not the way to go. We already pay a lot less than most other major counties like the UK or Canada. We need to start making plans to drill of the coast and in our own states immeadiently while dipping into our own stockpiles for the time being. When we get the oil from our states, we can replenish our stockpile while having new sources of oil.

There is no way you can realistically cut all emissions. We have to gradually cut emissions, otherwise we will be unable to sustain ourselves economically. That's why the Kyoto Protocol is important. It will help us get on a path to reducing carbon emissions significantly. But it will immediately reduce some of the most severe emissions throughout our country. There is no way we can reduce all emissions, but if we reduce some emissions, we will still be helping the environment-- however small a step it may be.

Its TOO small. It is not a bad plan, but I think we can do better. Again, it does not even deal witht he CO2 in the atmosphere which is what most major scientists say is the major problem. Whatever we end up putting into action has got to deal with.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"