Archive:Mearl-Bleitze-Stenbach Debate April 2014

This debate was held on April 14, 2014, two days before the 2014-II Election for Major Executive, with the candidates Jackson Mearl (Chief Ambassador, Chairman of the Joint Command Council, Union Party), Edward Stenbach (Chief Attorney, member of the Joint Command Council, Establishment Party), and Ryan Bleitze (Head of the Treasury, Authority Party). It was hosted by John Brayer (Deputy Speaker of the Administration at the time).

## Debate Format

I will ask all questions at once. The questions will alternate who must answer them first. You are permitted to an answer and a second answer after you hear your opponents (each of you get two chances to talk during most questions). Each candidate submitted two questions, and the moderator was allowed to put forth four unique questions which no candidate knew about ahead of time.

## Debate

#### 1. Please give an opening statement about why you believe you should be Major Executive

**Mearl:** Members of the Triumvirate, I joined your ranks two years ago in 2012 under Major Executive Ogamon, where I joined the first session of the Administrative Branch. I served on that branch until I became Deputy Speaker of the branch for this very trimester one year ago. In there I helped with the implementation of the PEACE Act, the formation of the Union Party, served on the committees on foreign affairs and defense, and played an important role in the Triumvirate Administrative Branch for over a year. After that, I began preparations to serve on the Executive Branch as Chief Ambassador as I knew that the sitting Chief Ambassador, a good friend of mine named Ehtya, would be retiring. I joined the Executive Branch and became Chairman of the Joint Command Council, nominated by Major Executive Maine, where I have been until today. I was then thrown into leading the Triumvirate's forces in the Desolaran Civil War and, in that, gained a lot of experience in defense and foreign affairs. I helped frame the treaty with the Occidental Coalition and secured the Triumvirate allies as Chief Ambassador. I should be the candidate you select as Major Executive because I am the most experienced candidate. Neither of my opponents have the defense or foreign policy experience that I do. That is the most important job of the Major Executive, the safety and security of the Triumvirate.

**Stenbach:** Look, you know who I am, you know what I stand for. The Triumvirate has more or less taken the side of either Mearl or Bleitze, I'm here as the third candidate, no shame in that. I'm here to show that neither of two people can be expected to represent everyone well. You need options. I want to prove to you that the Establishment Party is back, ready to be reborn and get back to work. We've all learned a lot in the last year, and the Triumvirate is better for it. We have new research and information to work with, and as someone who has lived through the last 12 months under Major Executive Maine, serving both in his Executive Branch and in an Administration that was both for him at times and against him at others, I know that I have the wide views and spectrum of knowledge that the office of Major Executive deserves. I'm a proponent of compromise, unlike either Bleitze or Mearl, who are both adamant on their views and refuse to negotiate on the key points. I have defense experience, economic experience, experience in the Administration, in the Executive Branch, with compromise, with diplomacy, with all of it. I am in the middle of these two others and I have a big range of abilities and experience. I want to be the candidate the Triumvirate deserves, even if I'm not the one it may want right now.

**Bleitze:** Triumviratans, my name may hold a certain association in your minds. Whether it be "Communist", "Socialist", "Statist", "Fascist", or just simply "Ryan Bleitze? Oh yeah, he's the guy who wants to destroy all of the businesses, have the government take control of everything, and abolish our freedom!" You are free to determine what I am and what I believe in on your own, but I'm sure you're all smart enough to realize I'm probably not as crazy as some have made me seem. You have to ask why my ideas are unpopular, and the answer is that there is an established group in the Triumvirate, very powerful, very power-hungry, very self-centered, whom my ideas conflict with. I am against big business, I am against capitalist cronyism, I am against defense and security spending, I am against foreign affairs, against a lack of regulation, and against poverty. The Union Party, represented through the abrasive voices of Aaron Ehtya, Clark McDearny, and yes... even my opponent, Jackson Mearl, supports all of those and, therefore, my identity and my beliefs threaten them. They are afraid. For years now they have rode on their high horses, wealthier than all, making hundreds at the expense of the rest of the Triumvirate, utilizing political and economic power to give a very few almost everything, and trying to take down anyone who opposes them. My party, the Authority Party, was founded to oppose them. We were founded as the party of the people, of a fair economic system in which no one has a distinct advantage over another, a party of realizing that the Triumvirate can be great if we only make it so. I am running for Major Executive because I have sat on both the Administrative Branch as Deputy Speaker and in the Executive Branch as Head of the Treasury and I have seen first and forehand how my ideas work, how economic liberalism, isolationism, and a populace-based government prosper. We have made the last year under Major Executive Maine a year of progress, we can't let that falter to my opponents who seek to reverse many of his key policies and denounce the incredible work he has done to promote economic equity, political transparency, and a stronger Triumvirate. You may not like all of my ideas, but no one will ever agree with all of the ideas of anyone. I run because I believe in what the Triumvirate can be, what it should be, and what it will be if you make me Major Executive: fairer, stronger, better.

#### 2. To get right to the most critical matter, how would you handle the Triumvirate's continuation of involvement in the Desolaran Civil War?

**Stenbach:** As someone who has served on the Joint Command Council significantly, I have been involved in the war a great deal and am intimately familiar with the current strategies and effects of the conflict. I have served alongside my opponent, Jackson Mearl, in fighting this war for the Triumvirate on behalf of Pania, which I note that my other opponent, Ryan Bleitze, is against in the first place. Though I believe the war is important and largely in our interests (indirectly), it should in no way be the number one focus. Our primary focus should be directly improving the Triumvirate via recruitment, infrastructure and site development, and economic growth.

**Bleitze:** I would begin weakening Triumvirate involvement, like Stenbach suggested. He mentions that we should focus on direct improvements to ourselves first, rather than indirect improvements to others. The time and energy we are putting into a war that doesn't need to exist in the first place could be spent on recruiting or bettering the economy, the two things I am most passionate about, unlike Jackson Mearl apparently.

**Mearl:** I would devote more energy towards ending the war quickly. No one knows this war better than I do, and you'd want a commander-in-chief who knows the war. This war has been good for the Triumvirate's morale, government, defense improvement, and even citizenship. We're getting better known from it and we owe it to Pania to not leave them behind.

**Stenbach:** Once again, I'm the moderate one here. I don't want to plunge in as head-first as Mearl, but I also recognize the importance of keeping our promise and remaining a major player in the war. If you want to keep the course that Major Executive Maine has kept in terms of this war, you should consider my foreign policy ideas, not theirs.

**Bleitze:** I'm not saying I would immediately withdraw, I just want to significantly reduce our efforts because they can be spent elsewhere. Mearl here wants us to put 100% into it, I want us to put in like 10%. That's how you can picture it.

**Mearl:** We will be done with it sooner and we can move to other things if we devote what we can now. The economy is doing well, the government can afford to focus on this.

#### 3. How would you differ from your opponents in approach to foreign affairs?

**Bleitze:** Mearl is very in favor of foreign affairs, Stenbach is fairly moderate, and I'm against them because they're demeaning to the Triumvirate. I want to pass tariffs on foreign goods, which will protect Triumvirate industry and business, while keeping foreign influence out of our market. It's something that a few Progressives and Establishmentarians can agree on, that we can raise revenue while protecting business if we impose tariffs on foreign nations. It's a way to knock out two birds with one stone, and there are almost no disadvantages. Will I be popular with foreigners with my policies? I won't, but the Triumvirate has always become stronger on its own, not with the outside world.

**Mearl:** You need to take some basics economic courses if you think a tariff is a good idea. You hurt our relationships with others, hurt our economy, hurt their economy, and isolate us from others and economic opportunities. If I become your Major Executive, I will make foreign policy my priority. More alliances, more involvement, international relations and business.

**Stenbach:** I would differ in approach in that I would make it less of a priority than Chief Ambassador Mearl but I'd also not be as strict and hostile to foreign figures as Bleitze is. I'm the moderate here, I'm with Major Executive Maine and his foreign policy agenda.

**Bleitze:** No, *you* need to take some basic economics and foreign relations courses if you think a tariff is a bad idea for us. We actually tax our own businesses... no foreign entity is taxed, regardless of if they are involved in our economy, which some are. Our businesses pay a (still low and unfair) rate of 10% of all income, but if Triumvirate citizens buy from a foreign business, there is no tax. The government loses out on revenue, foreign businesses get the upper hand on Triumvirate businesses, and the domestic Triumvirate is worse off.

**Mearl:** Tariffs create a deadweight loss and decrease the number of imports. We are a great place, we can produce many things well, but we need to look outwards if we want to grow.

**Stenbach:** Deadweight loss is a serious problem, tariffs are also detrimental to free markets. A free market is a better system than a regulated one, it's good for both us and them if we keep trade open.

#### 4. Who would you prefer to take your current office if you were elected as Major Executive?

**Mearl:** I would like to recommend Edward Stenbach to become the new Chairman of the Joint Command Council, as he has served under me on the JCC and knows the intricacies of the war at hand. For Chief Ambassador I believe there are several qualified candidates. Luke Cannon was the Deputy Chief Ambassador last trimester, he would be a good choice. Stenbach would also be a good choice. Senator McDearny might also be a good choice, which would open up a Senator seat for another Executive, while keeping McDearny's experience on hand for the Executive Branch. It's a discussion that the entire Executive Branch should have, but I would recommend the three of them before anyone else.

**Bleitze:** This Adelyn Ewart character might be a good suggestion for Head of the Treasury, as could Ronald Afferson.

**Stenbach:** This is somewhat tougher for me, as the Chief Attorney is a position that requires a lot of prior knowledge. Deputy Speaker Brayer would be a prime candidate for Chief Attorney, as might Chief of Staff Crown (though I know he intends to retire).

**Mearl:** I have nothing else to say.

**Bleitze:** Neither do I.

**Stenbach:** Me neither. Done here.

#### 5. What would you do to promote business creation and growth?

**Stenbach:** There are two factors for business creation: ease of creation and membership. Ease of creation is simple, we lower taxes, make registration of a new business less complicated, and stop imposing regulations and restraints on businesses. I am all in favor of each of those. The second aspect is more difficult, but it has been slowly improving over time, and has started to improve at more significant rates more recently, and that is getting more members. Improving citizenship numbers has been the goal of the current Majorate for the last year, and we've seen success. I think if we continue to put focus on that issue, improve our infrastructure to better bring in members, and make our incentives system more effective (with minimal cost), we can increase both membership and business creation.

**Mearl:** On this issue I agree with Edward.

**Bleitze:** This is the issue which will cost you the election. A government that is totally hands-off with regards to recruitment or business has failed, and it's been tried. Incentives work, we know that from the recruitment incentives program. In order to get more businesses, we need to crack down on the monopolistic corporations that are controlling the market and holding up all of their money. It's trust-busting time. No longer will one man be able to hold a third of the entire economy, subvert the law, and defy the government. Membership growth, a equal-opportunity economy, and a tax system that works to benefit those who need it are all subjects I have a lot of experience in and, as anyone will tell you, I have fought for each of those time and time again. If you want a good economy then you should vote for the Head of the Treasury that aided in creating the economic boom we are experiencing right now.

**Stenbach:** You didn't create the economic boom, in fact, your Fall Activity Return created a financial disaster. Major Executive Maine's stimulus and wise monetary policies (and, I note, willingness to approach and let businesses grow, creating a competitive atmosphere) created the good economic situation we are very fortunate to have right now. I just said I supported smart ways to boost membership (privatization as one of them, alongside with government, both have benefits) and that I want to, more or less, continue Maine's policies of creating a competitive business environment where we get the most bang for our buck.

**Mearl:** Agreed, but honestly I would devote more government attention to defense, foreign affairs, and diplomacy than the economy.

**Bleitze:** The Fall Activity Return was not a disaster, it is, in part, responsible for the economic boom we're experiencing right now (distributing money among citizens allowed them to start businesses, invest, and pay for basic services). Privatization of membership won't work, not without extreme government support. The amount of money that companies like UTC or Prime Personnel are charging is too high for almost everyone except for the very wealthy. That means that people like Aaron Ehtya could effectively buy 10 recruits all for his party, allowing him and his party to take control of the Triumvirate's government if they really wanted. When the government is heavily involved in recruitment, we broaden the playing field and make it more difficult for that to happen. The government can be the best thing for business if we believe that it can. This fear of government is not a wise one.

#### 6. Do you support "Mainenomics", where the short/mid-term fiscal welfare of the government is sacrificed for potential long-term securing of citizenship and infrastructure?

**Mearl:** Only mildly, and only if it's well orchestrated. Small government deficits to fund membership growth (as long as it's done in a way we know will work instead of as it is now where many of the recruits end up being inactive) can occasionally be good, but we have to be very careful and it's not something we should consider in any long-term legislation.

**Bleitze:** Absolutely. Long-term growth in citizenship is more important than going into debt (remember people, government debt is a good thing as it encourages support of the government and can be very good for the economy as the government can play a bigger role in funding big projects). The concepts derived from Mainenomics are the concepts of the future. Jackson here says that we are getting inactive members from these incentives, but that's been the case since as far back as we can document. We've always had the occasional inactive member, Nathan Maine knew that when he wrote his stimulus, that's why he made it a flat 20 tri per any recruit, and what happened? 40% growth in membership created by his original 2013-II Economic Stimulus and Infrastructure Investment Act, the bill that I co-sponsored and made sure got passed through the conservative Administrative Branch while I was Deputy Speaker. The government needs to be the strongest force in the developing economy because it has the information, the resources, and the responsibility to do so.

**Stenbach:** I believe we need more research. We shouldn't base long-term economic decisions on data gathered in the last 10 months, it's simply not a smart decision. If we do more research and that research indicates that it would be a good idea that will definitely pay off in the long run, I'll be all for it. We need to make sure we have smart ways of recruitment, smart sources of revenue, and a stable population base first though.

**Mearl:** The economy shouldn't be the Triumvirate's priority, ending the Desolaran Civil War should be. The government should look to contract with General Defense for more security and defense technology. If I am Major Executive I'd want to get General Defense more involved in our security and improving our safety.

**Bleitze:** I have been waiting all day for you to say that. Ladies and gentlemen, now you see the true face of the Union Party... exactly what I've been fighting against for the last year. Jackson, who claims to be a fan of government hands-off and less involvement in the economy, is now supporting a handout by the government (which he argues simply doesn't have the need or money to fund more recruitment or business incentives - **Things which we actually need**) to one of his personal friends and members of his party: General Defense, i.e. Aaron Ehtya... the wealthiest man in the Triumvirate. The wealthy get wealthier, but how? The government! This is capitalist-governmental cronyism... Mearl is against handouts... but here he is, giving handouts to his friends in big business. As for you, Edward, "I believe we need more research", you sound like a Republican who continues to deny global warming, using the exact same statement. 10 months of data is more than enough, you're just so rooted against liberal fiscal and economic policies that you will do anything you can to try and get out of admitting they work.

**Stenbach:** We didn't realize that an economic recession and bubble burst had occurred until the last few months... if it took us that long to find out something so big, it's not that unreasonable that I'd say we need more information for something this specific and specialized. Aaron Ehtya is the wealthiest man in the Triumvirate in party because he inherited a great fortune, in second because he and his family invested in the Triumvirate government when so few would (and were rewarded handsomely as the government succeeded), and in third because he and his family have worked harder than any others in the private sector. He should not be penalized for doing so much, he should be rewarded as he has: with deserved fortune.

#### 7. How would you tackle membership?

**Bleitze:** Raising incentives to 40 tri would be my first order of action. Then, I would propose policy to give every new citizen 20 tri the second they join the Triumvirate. That would be funded by printing 20 tri per new citizen, which would not cause inflation because it's directly tied to member growth. This would let new citizens have money to start their own companies or buy essential services (like legal certification, which costs money but is necessary for some jobs). We raise incentives and we get more members, everyone understands that. We give new members money and they spend money (meaning more production and output) and gives them a way to immediately get involved instead of wait on the sidelines.

**Stenbach:** Keep incentives where they are at, I'd likely extend the 30 tri incentive for a while if I could (as it expires eventually). Looking into privatization of the issue via companies like the United Trade Company and Prime Personnel is something we should focus more on though. It's a way to get recruits of high quality and high duration and activity with fair pricing, rather than a flat government payment. The government incentives are good and should stay because it makes it cheaper for parties or businesses to pay (as the government picks up part of the tab on each recruit), just like a subsidy, meaning we get more of them. I do not support the idea of just handing out 20 tri to every new member (even if it is new tri being coined for every new citizen) because the entire concept is that a new member will have no money, meaning they'd go and pursue a career, which increases output and gets more people working and employed, meaning that they earn money, we get a stronger labor force, and new citizens get experience that can help them down the line. If you give them 20 the second they join, the incentive to go and get work is destroyed.

**Mearl:** By being more active abroad. The more we put ourselves out there, the more people will hear about us, which means we get more recruits. We do that, in combination with the policies on the books (maybe make them simpler) and we'll have more members.

**Bleitze:** Even the old Establishment Party wasn't as backwards as you are, Jackson Mearl. Nathan Maine, Arnold Ogamon, Elliot Neil, Edward Stenbach, Andrew Mearl, Satine Ehtya... almost everyone from every party will acknowledge the fact that recruitment comes from within. Foreign actions don't bring recruits, there has never been any relationship there. In response to you, Stenbach, what harm would this really do? If we tie the amount of money in the economy to population by a one member to twenty tri ratio, we don't risk inflation and we have a reasonable and stable way to increase the money supply over time. If someone wants to go into business as an attorney, they need money right off the bat to take the test, we need to make sure that everyone starts out with some ability to be involved in the economic system, and the only way to do that is to make sure that everyone enters with something.

**Stenbach:** I agree with you here, Ryan, membership and recruitment come from people in the Triumvirate. Membership growth due to abroad dealings is slim to nothing. The harm it could do if you increase currency by 20 for each new member is not hard to grasp. Inflation could still happen if that member spends their money and then departs, meaning you get +20 tri in the economy while it having no purpose there. The government and private institutions are prepared to offer loans to people just entering, and political parties are another place where new members can get support. Giving each member 20 tri won't do good, it will cause inflation while hurting output and worth ethic.

**Mearl:** Recruitment has come from within historically because we haven't put an real effort out there for abroad. If we increase our attention we wouldn't have notability issues on Wikipedia anymore and we'd get more people too.

#### 8. What is a problem you see in the current Majorate that you would hope to fix?

**Bleitze:** Despite his actions to promote transparency, which he has done in many ways (release of old Executive Branch discussions), Major Executive Maine has not been personally transparent and has espoused privacy for himself and those in his inner circle. It's a distinctly unliberal form of governance, one that I would change by making it even more transparent and making it a government totally of the people. I have constantly tried to get the people more represented in government, by getting them the office of Senator (and then a second one - and I still want more!), proposing a popular vote for Major Executive (and I'm not done there, this will happen), and denouncing the elitist principles that make us look like self-absorbed fat cats. Government should be of the people and by the people, not by wealthy corporations or elitist swine of politicians.

**Stenbach:** You know, it's funny, Bleitze... You talk a lot about implementing a popular election for the Major Executive, but do you recognize the irony in the fact that, if that were to exist, you'd never become Major Executive? Your poll numbers aren't exactly fantastic, the business community despises you, and your ideas aren't as popular as you want to believe. Something I would change would be the nature of compromise. This Majorate has been particularly unwilling to compromise or negotiate with opponents, for better or worse (it certainly brought results), I want to put an end to that. There is room for all ideas, good or bad, and we don't make a good show of ourselves when we fail to be able to even speak candidly about things. We should not ignore one branch of government or one party, that's not what will make us stronger. If I am elected as Major Executive, I vow to be open with my proposals, and willing to take and negotiate with those who are against them initially.

**Mearl:** I would be a more traditional Major Executive, taking a step back from the last two Major Executives and leaving most management and legislating up to the Executive Branch. Something where the Major Executive does little besides its core functions, may help by specializing its work. Instead of the Major Executive doing almost everything (like Major Executive Ogamon, Major Executive Neil, or Major Executive Maine), I'd want to be more traditional like Major Executive Zerouh or Major Executive Stavrok in that the Major Executive does what is required of it (defense, site management) and then the other Executive offices do the work they're meant to do, instead of having the Major Executive step in and get involved on all of them.

**Bleitze:** Funnily enough, Major Executives Zerouh and Stavrok are considered the two worst Major Executives in history. We'll see how that goes for you, Mearl. Edward, Nathan Maine has been more than willing to compromise, you're just so biased for your party that you won't acknowledge that it was not the Major Executive who caused the government shutdown, but it was your party's inability to compromise in the first place. Let's not forget that your party went back on a deal the night before the shutdown! You feigning ability to compromise and negotiate is just sad and I certainly hope no one actually believes you, because that means people are far less intelligent than I had thought they were.

**Stenbach:** Two worst is being a little harsh, I'd put it that Ogamon, Maine, and Neil are definitely considered the three best, but that doesn't mean that Zerouh or Stavrok were necessarily bad. Compromise would have averted many of the unnecessary political conflicts, and my party is guilty of it as well, but I for one am always willing to talk to both sides on an issue and reach a mutual agreement. The shutdown would never have happened, the conflict would never have happened, if your Fall Activity Return hadn't spent all of the government's surplus funds on a weak welfare-like handout to all citizens. If I really couldn't compromise, then why was I the only conservative who signed on to the 2013-II ESIIA or the Banking Code or any other more moderate proposals made by the Major Executive or the Executive Branch in the last few trimesters?

**Mearl:** Stavrok had the right idea with his PEACE Act in terms of foreign actions, we need to be more aggressive out there, and make foreign affairs a priority. It can't sit on the sidelines like it has and it should have more attention. Stenbach is calling himself the moderate here, but the Union Party has always been seen as the party of moderation, in the middle on economic issues and political issues. We're more moderate than either Establishment or Authority.

#### 9. What has been your greatest achievement to date?

**Stenbach:** I helped put together the ARMED Act and the Banking Code, two pieces of legislation I'm very proud of, which I know firsthand have done good for the Union. My work during the Desolaran Civil War on the Triumvirate's Joint Command Council has also been a great experience I'm pleased with, as is my work as Chief Attorney and, formerly, as Deputy Speaker of the Administration. One last achievement I want to speak of is the rebuilding of the Establishment Party, which, as we all know, suffered some heavy fallout due last trimester. I know that my party, the party of Arnold Ogamon, Elliot Neil, and Andrew Mearl is on the brink of a big return, and I believe that I can usher that in and make 2014 a new year for the Establishment Party.

**Mearl:** The Desolaran Civil War and the Triumvirate's relationship with the Occidental Coalition are the two things I'd consider my greatest achievements so far. We've done well on both, and if the result of the war is positive (which I know it will be, regardless of how long it takes), these are two things that will set the Triumvirate up to have successful foreign policy for years to come.

**Bleitze:** The Fall Activity Return and 2013-II ESIIA are both economic measures that had great success and that I think of as my own personal best achievements. My ability to continue pressing on the issues I care about, which are the issues that the Triumvirate people care about: for community government and economic equality, despite the undeserved opposition to them. Unlike either Stenbach or Mearl, who have had no economic or governmental successes of their own, I have helped make the Triumvirate a better place for all, not for some.

**Stenbach:** ...I co-framed the 2013-II ESIIA and it never would have passed if I hadn't done so (I was the only member of my party who voted for it). You don't get to claim the benefits of it when it was primarily Major Executive Maine's idea in the first place. Your Fall Activity Return was one of the worst economic ideas in our history. I don't need to be the one to tell you that it caused a government shutdown, political hostility, and made people lazier. It's common knowledge at this point. You say I have no economic experience, but I worked on the stimulus over the summer, the Banking Code, and fought against the poor economic policies that largely originated from you, Bleitze.

**Mearl:** Bleitze, the economic equality you speak of is socialism. We are not socialists here, we believe in a free market and in freedom of all to pursue their own wealth. The rich shouldn't have to pay for being rich, they deserve what they have, just like the poor don't deserve more just because of their situation.

**Bleitze:** Edward, your party attempted to dismantle the 2013-II ESIIA last trimester, that was what caused the shutdown, not anything else. You failed to compromise (even though you want to do that now, supposedly...) and your party paid the price. How you managed to avoid the blame for that escapes me. I've been Head of the Treasury for two trimesters now, enforcing the taxes, making sure the public has the data on how much we spend, where we spend it, and the debt and budget risks involved. Mearl, yes, I am an economic socialist. If you're against my economic policies and I am Major Executive, you can vote against them, I'm sure many people will. I still believe them, and I'm sure there are ideas that Major Executive Maine has that you'd vote against too. I believe that we need to protect everyone in the economy, not just the wealthy; everyone deserves a fair chance.

#### 10. Please give a closing statement and sum up why the Executives should vote for you above your opponents?

**Mearl:** I am the candidate of experience, wisdom, durability, and security. I have the skills the Triumvirate needs. Neither of my opponents have that. Bleitze's experience is in poorly-planned monetary and economic policies, which have all failed or been saved by Major Executive Maine and the Union Party. Stenbach is too new to the Executive Branch to justify him above my own experience in the first place. If you elect me, I can guarantee another trimester of growth both in defense and in the economy, because I promote moderation and traditionalism in government. It's time to end the trend of it being a trade-off between liberalism and conservatism when it comes to the Major Executive, you can have both, you can have moderation, just vote for me.

**Bleitze:** If you want an equal Triumvirate, where everyone has the same opportunities, same rights, and no one is treated higher than anyone else, you should vote for me. I don't preach defense or security, or rights of the capitalist autocracy, or elitism, or rampant internationalism, unlike Jackson Mearl. Instead, I work day in and day out to make the Triumvirate fair, sensible, even, and open to all, regardless of who they are or what economic or personal situation they are put in. Everyone deserves a say and a chance to do well. As everyone from Arnold Ogamon to Nathan Maine have shown, regardless of what they personally believed, government can do a lot of good. The distrust of government or disbelief that government can do good for everyone is something I want to change. Government, which solved the membership problem, fixed the economy, evened the playing field for businesses, passed laws to create citizenship systems, and has always come through in the end, should be trusted to make the Triumvirate a better place as it has always done.

**Stenbach:** Jackson Mearl is too valuable where he is to risk placing him in the office of Major Executive, he also has no economic or social experience. Ryan Bleitze would be an economic catastrophe, put the Triumvirate in a vulnerable position with regards to defense, and make us look undesirable and weak with regards to foreign affairs. As for me? Defense experience: check. Leadership experience: check. Economic experience: check. Foreign affairs experience, legal knowledge, political connections, willingness to compromise: check, check, check, check. I'm the candidate the Triumvirate needs. I'm not at the extreme here, I'm in the middle. If you want to continue the growth and expansion we've seen in the last four trimesters thanks to two fantastic Major Executives, then I'm your man. I hope, if nothing else, that I made you at least consider the merits of my opponents, and that you'll consider me, if not this election, in the future. Thank you.