• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
My manifesto is the only one which garuantees the expansion of a significantly sized American Expeditionary Force, capable of projecting American power across both seas and giving us diplomatic leverage in Oceania, Asia, Europe and West Africa to be built alongside a new Pacific Fleet.

I feel we must secure our influence in the Americas before we focus too greatly in Asia, and we definately shouldn't run the risk of fighting a colonial war. But what Mr Demchak says is true; now that we share borders with the Pacific we should certainly pay close attention to developments across the ocean and maintain a balance of power so no power evolves which threaten our own country.
 
Last edited:
I congragulate you, sire, on seeing the light!

President: Democrat: Cartwright/Walsh (VPs are allowed to vote, yes?)

It won't make a difference, since all three of the VPs will vote for themsleves, cancelling each other out, so it's easier on me if you don't.
 
Edited away. Is this AV or FPTP?
 
I must admit that I find the Democrat manifesto extremely attractive; not out of their own merit (which they have, indeed) but rather out of our own weakness. The following remarks are meant as friendly questions to a colleague, not as attacks to an opponent.

In the President's proposals there are no clear means of securing the West: yes, winning the war and supporting the army are fine, but we also need naval presence and transports. Now that we are present in both the Atlantic and the Pacific we must be able to react to threats in both fronts; in order to do it there are two options: massive forces in the East and West or a smaller, much more mobile force. The second one is far more economic, but it requires a quick link through the Rocky Mountains (or ships going around Cape Horn); so a transcontinental railroad is a matter of national security. They propose it, we don't.

On another point, the idea of healthcare support has a nice ring to it, but there's the issue of funds: more expenses require more taxation, who is going to pay for all this?

Finally, there's slavery. In the manifesto the word is not even present; while the Democrats are re-introducing their Payed Freedom Act. They're proposing a small advance in the matter while we are silent? As far as I knew Whigs were the pro-freedom liberals not them.
 
I must admit that I find the Democrat manifesto extremely attractive; not out of their own merit (which they have, indeed) but rather out of our own weakness. The following remarks are meant as friendly questions to a colleague, not as attacks to an opponent.

In the President's proposals there are no clear means of securing the West: yes, winning the war and supporting the army are fine, but we also need naval presence and transports. Now that we are present in both the Atlantic and the Pacific we must be able to react to threats in both fronts; in order to do it there are two options: massive forces in the East and West or a smaller, much more mobile force. The second one is far more economic, but it requires a quick link through the Rocky Mountains (or ships going around Cape Horn); so a transcontinental railroad is a matter of national security. They propose it, we don't.

On another point, the idea of healthcare support has a nice ring to it, but there's the issue of funds: more expenses require more taxation, who is going to pay for all this?

Finally, there's slavery. In the manifesto the word is not even present; while the Democrats are re-introducing their Payed Freedom Act. They're proposing a small advance in the matter while we are silent? As far as I knew Whigs were the pro-freedom liberals not them.

Well I've said previously about the creation of an American Expeditionary force and a new Pacific Fleet. On the issue of a railroad, we believe only private investment is how such a project can be achieved while still being economical.

On healthcare the purpose of the review is to answer exactly that and other important questions, we don't want to make such a far-reaching reform without proper and thorough consultation and planning.

On slavery I have already offered my support to the Payed Freedom Act and I shall introduce another peice of legislation on slavery in the next term.
 
I, Jeremiah Brass of the Whig Party, endorse no candidate.
 
Having read up on this a bit I'm ready to join in.
Character picture: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/John_Leeds_Kerr_profile.jpg
Name: James Boozeman Kerr
Position: Whig senator from Maryland, notable for strong pro-immigration sentiments
Bio: Born in Easton, Maryland and graduated from St. Johns College in Annapolis, Maryland in 1809 after which he traveled extensively through south america and the Caribbean before returning to Easton and starting a legal practice. Elected to the state senate in 1831, he was elected to fill the senate in 1840 to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Senator John S. Spence.

I will be casting my first vote for the reelection of president John F. Cameron.
 
Last edited:
An Open Letter from Portland

By Secretary of State Daniel Gallatin,

Today by courier I was informed that I have been selected to run as the estimable President Cameron's Vice Presidential candidate for this upcoming election. It is a noble position and responsibility, and I believe I can serve in this position to my best and further the great causes of the administration.

When placing a person in such a high position, it is reasonable for a free people to wish to know what a person would do in that position. With that in mind, I am writing this letter to inform the public as to my goals should I be elected Vice President. I will begin by addressing some speech transcripts and articles that were also delivered by the courier to me today.

I am torn between Cameron and Cartwright; in a truly free market, where the best are chosen based solely on merit and not where you were born, immigrants would prosper. I believe Mr. Cameron is the best choice for that reason. However, Mr. Cartwright also acknowledges the right, nay, the destiny of the United States to expand into the Pacific; Mr. Cameron seems to only be concerned with Latin America and Europe. If the United States of America is to receive the respect it deserves from the Old World, we must prove our mettle by force of arms, force of the economy, and force of diplomacy.

Would a representative from Mr. Cameron's campaign consider addressing his plans for expansion into the Pacific? We border two oceans, not one, and I cannot support a candidate who does not consider this.
America is now a vast republic of freedom for many peoples. We are a great beacon of liberty shining across an entire continent.

As such, we have many regions, and unlike the Hapsburg or the Spaniard we see the great potential in all these people working together - not underneath the heel of one, but rather at an equal and mutual responsibility and common friendship.

As Vice President I find myself taken from a role of bringing together nations in the field of diplomacy to bringing together states in the field of politics. I embrace this change in roles, as it means I will always be among my people.

In preparation, I have divided the states and territories of our Union into four general categories (although there are many more specific differences state by state, I will not bore the reader with those details). Much has been said about the North and the South, of course. I will be overseeing programs supporting the further industrial development of these regions - making sure tariff levels do not stifle the sale of cotton or other produce, while keeping up programs that encourage the production of a diversified and prosperous land. I will be pleased to see the further development and prosperity brought by the economic policies of President Cameron. Already we have seen the great expansion of railroads and commerce ways, and all kinds of commerce with this free market. Trust the common man to know what is right, and support him -do not hassle him with the intervention of far away bureaucrats or economic limitations.

Less has been said about our new North and our new South, though. The West is a new place - a new ocean, a new landscape, the same American dream.
I and the Cameron Administration wish to see these lands grow up and become just as great as the states further east. An expeditionary force and navy must be made to provide the solid security of these lands. From my experience in the navy, I know the importance of these developments, and the importance of providing support infrastructure to aid in the communication and transportation between these theatres of defense. As such, it is my goal to further encourage a balanced distribution of the military and militias of all states for all states, ready to defend against any attack, and the expansion of our great railroad system and industrialization to connect the two coasts as one.

In these interests, and the interests of the people of the Rio Grande region in Alta California, I support the integration of these new territories, providing a mutual support for our current Western territories. Here we find Americans and people who think like Americans who share our values and who can share in our liberty and union. Soldiers who can fight with us, factories which can produce with us, providing a self sustained Western coast, but also one with more and better railway and communication connections - more self sustained and more intertwined with the rest of the Union.

Then all four corners - our Eastern North and South and our Western North and South can share in this free and equal republic.

Fellow Americans, we stand on the verg of a shift within our Nation. That verg is to support one of the two oldest parties within our nation, that have shown through recent elections that they would rather argue more among themselves then do what is best for the nation, or to support the rising Southern Nationalist Party who has, from their founding, shown that they put the best for our nation through swift decisive unity time and again.
General Khur is a well respected military man, but I would like to remind him that a republic does not function like a brigade.

Let us look into our own history to see a party which "argued more among themselves". Our country has been founded on the former, not the latter. To form a more perfect Union, our founding fathers debated and argued and developed common principles that would best benefit all of the nation. How do we not, in following their example and the example of General Washington - who supported republican values of discourse and common good above that of swift decisive actions to make for unity modeled in his image - not support the best for our country?

Look at the results if you do not believe already! America has prospered and become prestigious. We have peace with the great powers of Europe. We have developed the country as a whole. We have brought unity in the Union. We have seen great expansion of industry and new technologies. We have supported our good conscience and protected the rights of man and the sovereignty and safety of our people.

Were these created by monarchical "unity" and rash decisions? No! They were the product of discussion and reasoned arguments. This is how our government works, General Khur.

-------------
Now, as Vice President I will continue my work in overseeing the development of the security of our border states, new and old.
I will work on the implementation of the Payed Freedom Act and later legislation which shall further save us from the shackles of slavery while supporting and uplifting the southerners as part of our Union and equal brothers in our house of democracy.
As I alluded to above, I will help to manage the discourse between the states, to form a closer Union of brotherly friendship, while supporting the freedom and individuality that each area brings.
Together with this, I will help oversee the great expansion of industry that will continue with President Cameron's sound economic policies, and the development of a reasonable and powerful defensive force along all the nation.

Secretary of State,
Daniel Gallatin
 
((Yep, looks like it won't matter though :)))

No, vote Cartwright/Walsh!
 
Well I've said previously about the creation of an American Expeditionary force and a new Pacific Fleet. On the issue of a railroad, we believe only private investment is how such a project can be achieved while still being economical.

On healthcare the purpose of the review is to answer exactly that and other important questions, we don't want to make such a far-reaching reform without proper and thorough consultation and planning.

On slavery I have already offered my support to the Payed Freedom Act and I shall introduce another peice of legislation on slavery in the next term.

On the issue of the railroad: you and I know that there are ways for the State to, let's say 'incourage', the investment in the right way. Obviously the line would be privately run and funded... Perhaps I could draft some sort of act on the matter....

On slavery: It should've been mentioned in the manifiesto, in order to clarify our position.

Anyways, you Sir have bought my vote:

Vote: Cameron/Gallatin
 
If you want to draft an act my administration will do its upmost to support it and implement it effectively.