# data[].attributes.body
I think the worst policy would be trying to reassure allies and deterring enemies because it would be really hard to make all of our critical allies agree to confront enemies.

If I were president, I would pass the pipeline, but try to reroute it to avoid the underground fresh water and sacred lands that the Native Americans are trying to protect.

I think it would be better if the states had control of the climate issues.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the way trump saw the deal with climate change. We need to stand up against other countries. The Paris agreement is good but as for american we need help from other countries like china.

If i was president i would also do the pipelines but redirect them into different locations. =

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Justin and Dawson that the Paris Climate agreement was an unfair trade agreement for the United States. However, leading by example in this situation may not result in much economic stability, as it would require America to make some serious leaps to achieve the goals of the Paris agreement without damaging our economy. In addition to this, if America is contributing the most to the Paris Agreement, the result may be that businesses in America relocate to other countries whose regulations are less strict on emission. The result would be less jobs and businesses in America and the Paris Agreement would ultimately be hurting the American economy.

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental policy -
I think we should leave this decision to the states individually because many states have different environments and stuff, also all that states have there own separate ideas on how to handle this decision.

Foreign policy -
I didn't like increase in homeland security, I mean we already have a good if not great borders, plus ICE is really there job to the fullest. Half of the people living in our country are immigrants and refugees, our country was built upon the idea of America being  a welcoming place, i think taking that away isn't right.

# data[].attributes.body
Well I think Trump should've gone to the Paris agreement and try to negotiate for a way better deal for everyone. Instead of just pulling out before even trying to get a better deal. I do believe economic security means national security, because in order to do anything in the history in the world takes money. To maintain a standing army, navy, airforce, etc requires money. Also I heavily disagree with Dawson, in order to have peace one must prepare for war. This is a fact for countries like us, who have many rivals and threats. We must be prepared for war at all times

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that the paris agreement was overly exaggerated just a bit, and should not of have been made to be  as such a big deal. Although it does have some relevance and a purpose to it.

I feel that the "peace through strength" is an important policy because, being prepared and strong for peace, just means you are ready, conserved, and cautious for whatever is to come. I feel that there is nothing wrong with being ready for the worst to come.

Economic security is national security can go both ways, in some sense I would not want my money to be handled in such a way, but it will be protected.

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental Policy-
I agree that I don't think Trump should be waiting to give the "okay" just because China needs to go forwards on the plan first.In a way it seems like America is not first because our leader is waiting for another country to start.

# data[].attributes.body
The point that America should've acted like a leader in the Paris agreement is one I never thought about but would be a really good alternative, and I agree that trump shouldn't have left with the point that it puts only america on the spot for emissions, but that he should've left with the point that more should be contributed or thought about in the Paris agreement, or instead a new agreement be made including all the major emitting nations.

I agree with what was said about the peace through strength policy, and how its just a mean of deterrence, making America both powerful and sustaining peace.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked the 2nd document as a whole because it was really interesting to me and so far it's been a reading that I actually had opinions on. It also wasn't hard for me to keep focus on it.

# data[].attributes.body
The policy I don't like and I think it is the worst policy that is all foreign countries are now required to share critical information with the US about their nationals because the people who come to the US , they are already checked. I think it is just the reason of the President to keep away the people he doesn't like. In addition, I like the word" completely defeated ISIS " because I think the people who are fighting in the war no more, so they should have power to make decisions.

# data[].attributes.body
I don’t think it was wise for Trump to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement, despite the fact that approximately half the country may not believe in climate change. If the conditions under which the U.S. was involved with the agreement were actually that bad, I personally think that we could have and should have compromised is some way in order to make it possible to stay in agreement with the document.

# data[].attributes.body
just because you believe something doesn't mean people have to respect your opinion. If you have no evidence solid evidence to support your claim, then you have no claim.

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

We can have factories as long as they are regulated and clean, its not like these companies are broke.

If you properly align your chakara then climate change will go away

Oil is not a sustainable resource
wind and electricity are sustainable.

If we create electricity then you don't have to pay for it.

CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA!!
OIL OIL OIL OIL OIL OIL OIL!!
CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA!!

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental Policy -
I agree with August with the process of the Paris agreement but I feel Trump shouldn't be able to downsize national monuments to drill for oil and other natural resources.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with what Trump is doing with the national monuments and decreasing the size of them by over 50%. I agree with David when he stated each individual state should have control over what they do. I feel like we should look over what benefits the planet and keeps us safe as opposed to financial priority.

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental Policy
- I agree with August as far as Paris but as far as his other plans I feel that there should be another option to go forth making the environment policies.
- Giving power over to the states as far as the environment is not a bad idea because the states do know what is best for their state. But who knows.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that what trump is doing is right but then at the same time it's like why go and shrink the monuments, it's been there for years upon years.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with August on the Paris Agreement and how Trump should do something now about the emission and not wait for another country to doing something before he does. I agree with David on how they should the freedom to the states, where you should tax heating in Washington and not in Texas. But then there will be states that won't want it and won't do anything about it.

# data[].attributes.body
Trump did state that he would enter into the agreement if they rewrote it to be more fair across all countries. I would do something similar but I would be more clear with the statement that climate change is a problem.
I also think the state's should have some power, but they should have some national guidelines to follow.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that giving power to the states would be a good idea because those states would be able to do whats best for their states.
Also, scaling back national monuments I feel is not the greatest idea just to extract oil and natural gas when we can get oil and natural gas from other countries. Its not really necessary
\.

# data[].attributes.body
I would do the exact same thing Trump is doing except for his scaling of national monuments. I don't think he should be able to shrink monuments to use the extra land for oil and gas extraction.

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental policy:
I agree with August on the Paris agreement and that it is biased towards the US and that Trump would rejoin if they rewrote the agreement
I believe that the shrinking of national monuments should not have been done just to use the natural resources and to mine for oil.
Giving power to the states could work but could also go terribly wrong. different climates and different mentalities could effect the effectiveness of the disperse of power. States know specifically what they need but can also take advantage of the situation and not enforce any regulations at all.
I agree on maybe starting to single out the problem areas and helping those.
Focus on the short and long term effects of all decisions made.
Making electricity most efficient by having states help out states.

# data[].attributes.body
Environmental policy: I agree that the Paris agreement needs to be rewritten. I think the states should have control.