Ted Heintz

Strongly Agree

Even if we put aside issues of forcing people to support things in violation of religious beliefs, infanticide, corruption, sales of body parts, etc. there is also the issue that Planned parenthood is in my opinion essentially a political entity and money laundering scheme.

Neutral

I am interested in this topic and I have concerns. For example, could this be abused with the elderly or infirm being potentially pressured or coerced?

To save the life of the mother. Note that I said mother and not "birthing person"! In the case of rape a morning after pill or something similar may be appropriate.

Strongly Disagree

I assume the question means "additional redistribution" because that already happens. They're called taxes and public support programs and we do need both of those things. The question is how much, who pays, and who is eligible? These are areas where we can do better. For example, there are several tax reform ideas that could make things better than what we have now. Ones that interests me would include the flat tax.

Strongly Agree

Biden's Socialist Spending Spree MUST END! It is a deliberate and malicious effort at destroying our economy, our freedom, and our country. It will destroy the middle class leaving only the elites and those too poor and dependant to challenge them, and that is one of the goals.

Ideas include but are not limited to a flat tax, a simplification and or reduction in exemptions, a national sales tax, an elimination of the income tax (we did not originally have one), and others. One big pet peeve of mine is property taxes because with property taxes you never really truly own your home, you just rent it from the government. I also object to the use of property tax relating to school funding as this contributes to some very glaring and negative education disparities! We can do better.

Strongly Agree

I am currently being wrongfully and unlawfully discharged from the National Guard due to religious persecution from the Biden administration. They are in violation of long established law and regulations. This is one part among several of my decision to run.

Strongly Disagree

NO! Unless they have a monopoly, which is another issue itself, you can just go somewhere else.

The much mythologized, misunderstood, and misapplied reference to a separation of church and state is not in our Constitution. To the degree to which there should be a separation of church and state it is meant to keep government out of the church, not the church out of the government. This is an important distinction. While we do have freedom of religion it is undeniably true that our nation is founded on Judeo-Christian values. It is ok to acknowledge that while also respecting the right of people to pursue other faiths. That's called "freedom"!

Given recent events and the corruption, politicization, and weaponization of government and the administrative agencies such as the CDC, who, notably, has been caught lying and fabricating far too many times, I am having to re-evaluate this and I am still developing my thoughts on this matter.

Option C. At a minimum we should start by returning to a pre-Obama care status, since it is, pardon the term, such an abortion, and then re-assess how to move forward. I have lived in Europe and experienced Socialized medicine. It is not the miracle that some think. Much of the problem with healthcare has to do with too much government interference, therefore, more government interference is not necessarily going to make it better and will be even more likely to make it worse!

Option B. First, we must realize that freedom is a subjective term! Not everyone actually wants what we call or think of as freedom or is ready for its responsibilities. Now consider, better the devil you know than the one you don't and power abhors a vacuum. For example Libya's Qaddafi was indeed a dictator and had indeed sponsored terrorism in the past, however Reagan cowed him and brought him to heel . After 9/11 he went on a purge of possible terrorists from Libya because he was afraid we would come do it for him. Are we better off and safer with Libya the way it is now? Are Libyan's better off or safer now? NOPE! Now there are terrorist operating freely in Libya and open air slave markets where human beings including women and children are sold! Great job Obama and Hillary, great job! Lastly, we should not fight harder for someone than they are willing to fight for themselves. A comparison of Afghanistan and Ukraine is very enlightening in this matter.

Strongly Disagree

First, "Refugees" from who/what? They became refugees when genocidal war criminals tried to wipe out Israel. Arab-Palestinian citizens do have equal rights, political parties, & representation in Israel. The Abraham accords offer a genuine chance for the growth of peace. Those in the West Bank & Gaza who voted for literal terrorist are responsible for that choice. Hopefully they may yet change their heart, grow, & prosper under a less evil government.

Strongly Agree

My first love was a girl I met on a school trip to China. She fled persecution to Sweden. Chasing her started my European adventures. I love Chinese culture, people, & food. I hate Communism, slavery, & genocide. The Communist Party of China is evil & should be treated accordingly. Everything we do in China we can do here at home or in India, the worlds largest democracy & largest population of English speakers, & a highly educated workforce. Shifting to India will hurt both China & Russia too.

SECURE THE BORDER! SO MANY OTM's (Other Than Mexican) coming in! Surrendering to & giving terrorist almost $90 billion in weapons & unknown thousands of American hostages is also not great! STOP taking refugees from hostile countries or those who present an increased risk for terrorist associations! DEPORT refugees already here who make terrorist threats or are shown to be radicalized. Support Israel & other Middle East partners in their anti-terror efforts. And, again, for emphasis, SECURE THE BORDER.

Strongly Agree

YES! Walls DO work but only if you actually build and USE them! It helps if there aren't giant gaps in them at major threat points too!

Strongly Agree

Illegal immigration also inherently & inescapably involves human trafficking & slavery. Leaders of sanctuary cities should be brought up on charges as criminal co-conspirators and accessories to the crimes, at the very least. Yes, seriously.

The simple albeit very subjective answer is those who will help make the US a better place. A better answer might include prioritizing candidates with skills where we have a critical shortage such as medical professionals. We may also wish to focus on skills where we want to decrease prices by increasing a specific skill pool. For example, if I wanted to lower the cost of hiring an architect maybe I would allow more architects in. Of course, we should also consider humanitarian concerns. In a purely pragmatic sense though we have to make sure that the greater interest of the US is put first and indeed this may include humanitarian concerns as that is a big part of who we are.

Strongly Disagree

Sexual orientation, yes. Gender identity, no. I refuse the insanity of coerced/forced speech of using some infinite variety of pronouns. Furthermore I WILL defend women's and girls sports. A biological male competing against biological girls is CHEATING! It's the same as if one of the girls was shooting up steroids.

Strongly Disagree

There actually is systemic and institutional racism in the US. It is being manufactured by professional racist. By that I mean literally people who derive their purpose, power, & income from creating racism. Other examples include college admissions, hiring quotas, etc. The actual true level of racism in this country is so low that people have to fake hate crimes. Now that's a "juicy" story!

Christian with a large helping of pragmatism. For example, you never win anyone over to your side with hate. If you protest at funerals of service men and women, people will think you are a jerk, and tune you out. They will not say, oh yeah, I guess that angry hateful jerk is right, I'm going to change my life and be more like them now. Never gonna happen. Also, I'm not the divine judge, that is not for me to decide. Changing veins, I love to help people, I've dedicated my life to helping others. However, you have to be careful not to care more about people than they care about themselves. Not everyone deserves your energy, for example, "Don't throw pearls before swine" and "wipe the dust off your feet" are biblical references to keep in mind.

Strongly Disagree

This depends on how you feel about vote fraud. If you support vote fraud I guess you would be fine with no ID. If you are against vote fraud then photo ID is a minimum requirement.

Universal requirements for photo Id in order to vote. Ban ballot harvesting, it's a fraud fest. Address voter interference such as censoring Hunter's laptop. End gerrymandering. Count only legal residents for the purpose of determining number of representatives, this is a big reason the Socialist are actively maliciously destroying us with illegal immigration.

Strongly Disagree

Who pays? The party who supported slavery? Hint, it wasn't Republicans, they are the party founded specifically to oppose slavery. What if they are recent immigrants? What if they are mixed race? Do they get a pro-rated payment?

Yes. There are at least 2 major organizations of professional racist, Antifa and BLM, who are both socialist/communist violent revolutionaries and domestic terrorists.

Strongly Agree

It helps increase the yield of a well and decrease waste and loss which decreases the number of wells that must be worked which decreases surface environmental disruption and is thus good for the environment.

Neither. That is a false dichotomy. Alaska has a very solid record and example of ecologically responsible resource development. The two are not mutually exclusive or mutually detrimental.

Moderate

I am indeed a moderate and perhaps what may have once been called a classical liberal. Sadly the Democrats have abandoned me and others like me as they have moved towards socialism and the radical left. I am a strict constitutionalist and an advocate for individual rights. Individuals can exists without groups or society but groups and society can not exist without individuals. Therefore the rights of the individual who is the foundation of all else must take precedent over that of groups.

I don't have any. I am brand new at this.We complain about elitist and career politicians but then regular normal humans don't run. Well, here I am, send me.

No.

It is ok to disagree, we just need to be civil and peaceful about it. That is the core of freedom and civilization. Our entire country was founded on protecting minority opinions and dissent. That is why we are a Republic not a true Democracy. A true Democracy would be mob rule and neither allow nor protect different opinions or dissent. Lastly, and most importantly, free speech is a foundational requirement of freedom. Saying something that someone does not like is not hate speech it's just speech that they hate. I may disagree with what you say but when I joined the Army I volunteered to protect, and if necessary, fight, kill, or die for your right to say it. Many others before me did as well, please remember that when considering all this censorship and cancel culture controversy. Best wishes to you and yours. Ted Heintz repairtherepublic@protonmail.com FREE YOUR MINDS VOTE FOR HEINTZ!

Strongly Agree

Otherwise they can't do their job and they would be constantly harassed with lawsuits. Also, many people do not understand that qualified immunity does not mean complete immunity, hence the "qualified" part. Police can, should, and do get sued and get criminally charged when they violate the protections of qualified immunity by acting outside the scope of the job.

Strongly Disagree

De-criminalizing and taxing marijuana at the Federal level could help pay for both while also decreasing incarceration and related costs. That's just one idea. I'm just saying, it's food for thought.

Keep guns out of the hands of convicted violent felons.

Strongly Disagree

Can I sue Ford if someone driving a Ford crashes into me? NOPE! However, I CAN sue and/or bring charges against the PERSON who was using the car/gun.