I'll try to make this simple. There are so many issues that I feel have so many nuances that it can be hard to have a hard stance one way or the other.
For example - Michigan is one of the most naturally gifted states in this country. Not even touching on the Great Lakes (aptly named), we have trees, rivers, mineral deposits, natural gas reserves, etc etc. I believe we need to do what we can to protect our environment and ensure that future generations get the chance to enjoy it like we did.
I also am a firm believer that we can still use some of our natural gifts to help aid the state. I'm talking safe drilling on unprotected lands, using mines when possible and safe to do so, and doing our best to welcome in solar, wind, and hydroelectricity to cut down on our fossil fuel dependency. I don't think a cold turkey switch is the right approach to the fossil fuel issue. A smooth and planned transition will make it easier on employers, consumers, and producers.
I know this may not be the popular answer for some democrats, and I probably have done a nice proper job annoying both sides with my stance on this, but I promise to always be open and up front with my thoughts on an issue, as well as an openness to debate and conversation on what will ultimately be the most beneficial for both the now and long term.