Fox News host Tucker Carlson delivered six key questions on Ukraine — and the ongoing war with Russia — to a number of GOP candidates who have either declared a bid for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination or are likely to do so.

Carlson explained in a video tweeted on Monday that he had been largely impressed with the answers — save for name-dropping a couple of candidates who had not answered the questions at all — and that they had not been in line with the narrative most often heard from prominent Republican leaders like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

WATCH:

We asked every potential 2024 GOP presidential candidate to answer six key questions on the war in Ukraine. As promised, their full responses are below. pic.twitter.com/tjcM4w54cR

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) March 14, 2023

Carlson began by listing the questions he had asked, saying that he had only thrown them out there because legacy media outlets appeared disinterested in pursuing any avenue that did not end with more money going to Ukraine.

Is opposing Russia in Ukraine a vital strategic interest for America? What’s our objective in Ukraine and how will we know we’ve achieved it? What is the limit of money and weapons you’d be willing to send to Zelensky? Should the United States support regime change in Russia? Have U.S. sanctions been effective? Does the United States face the possibility of nuclear war with Russia?

The popular Fox News host went on to say that, of the declared candidates, former Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC) had not responded to the questionnaire. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton — whom Carlson had identified as a potential 2024 hopeful — informed the show that he was busy with other things and could not take the time to respond.

“Most of the rest of them did get back to us, and we are grateful that they did,” Carlson continued, adding, “In general, the answers were fascinating, some of them were so thoughtful and so smart they give you hope for the Republican Party. With only a few exceptions, their answers bore no resemblance at all to the statements you see every day from Mitch McConnell and various Republican committee chairmen in Congress.”

Carlson went on to say that Republicans in Congress were more likely to be “committed neocons” and thus more likely to support funding Ukraine’s ongoing war than some of the Republicans who are or may be running for president in 2024.

What followed was a preview of the responses from every potential contender – and then a Twitter thread including their complete responses.

Former President Donald Trump, after claiming that Russia would not have attacked Ukraine if he had been in the White House, said that he would demand that Europe pick up a more equitable share in the cost.

“Start by telling Europe that they must pay at least equal to what the U.S. is paying to help Ukraine,” he said in part. “They must also pay us, retroactively, the difference. At a staggering 125 Billion Dollars, we are paying 4 to 5 times more, and this fight is far more important for Europe than it is for the U.S.”

Florida Governor @RonDeSantisFL answers our Ukraine questionnaire:

“While the U.S. has many vital national interests – securing our borders, addressing the crisis of readiness within our military, achieving energy security and independence, and checking the economic, cultural,… https://t.co/1I2elVi6hI

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) March 14, 2023

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has not yet declared a run for the presidency, also weighed in on the issue.

DeSantis, a Navy veteran himself, criticized the Biden administration for failing to define an objective and committing American taxpayers to footing a seemingly endless bill.

“Without question, peace should be the objective. The U.S. should not provide assistance that could require the deployment of American troops or enable Ukraine to engage in offensive operations beyond its borders,” DeSantis said, warning against providing aid that could easily be seen as an escalation against Russia. “F-16s and long-range missiles should therefore be off the table. These moves would risk explicitly drawing the United States into the conflict and drawing us closer to a hot war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers. That risk is unacceptable.”

Former Vice President Mike Pence said that “victory” would be a free and peaceful Ukraine — and suggested that Russia’s posturing with regard to the nuclear threat was just that.

“Putin is still ‘the small and bullying leader of Russia,’ his talk of nuclear war is a bullying tactic that he used at the start of the invasion. But Putin should know the United States will not be bullied. This administration has not led with strength on the world stage, but America is still a nation that believes peace comes through strength,” Pence explained.

2024 GOP Presidential Candidate @VivekGRamaswamy answers our Ukraine questionnaire (1/3)

Is opposing Russia in Ukraine a vital American national strategic interest?

“No, it is not “vital.” Rather, this is a stark reminder of what is a vital American national strategic interest:… https://t.co/P8SdCeethC

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) March 14, 2023

Vivek Ramaswamy, who has declared his candidacy, noted that the war was not a “vital” interest — pointing out the fact that the wane of American energy independence under President Joe Biden had created a situation that made it advantageous for Russia to invade Ukraine.

“This is a stark reminder of what is a vital American national strategic interest: national energy independence. This war is a symptom of America’s lack of self sufficiency. Putin is a tyrant and started this needless war, but he did so because we created incentives that tipped the balance of his decision-making in favor of invading: if he knows the West relies on him to provide oil and gas (because the U.S. and Western Europe have self-inflicted limitations on their own ability or willingness to produce), then Putin is in a stronger position–and that led him to think he could win,” he said. “The more America is reliant on foreign energy and oil, the less leverage we have with petro dictators.”

Carlson also provided the full answers he received from South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. In addition to Haley and Bolton, he noted that former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu did not respond to the questions.

Bella Ramsey will not be recast as Ellie on the popular HBO Max series “The Last of Us,” creators have confirmed.

Fans were wondering if the 19-year-old star would reprise the role for season 2. While Ramsey plays a 14-year-old girl in the first season, which is based on a video game of the same name, the second part jumps forward five years. This led to speculation that Ellie’s role could be recast to better reflect the character’s age.

Showrunners Craig Mazin and Neil Druckmann addressed the rumors during a virtual press conference ahead of the season finale on Sunday. “Let’s put this thing to rest,” Druckmann said of the rampant rumors.

“One of the things about the casting process that’s tough is that we invite people to join us on this process, and we know everything [about the secrets of the production] and nobody else knows anything except what they know, which is the game,” Mazin said, per Entertainment Weekly. 

He continued, “We know what we’re gonna do in terms of costume and makeup and hair, but more importantly, we also know the spirit and soul of the actor.”

Mazin went on to discuss how “The Last of Us” fans were initially upset that Ramsey had a different look compared to Ellie in gameplay. The series co-creator talked about how that controversy was eventually resolved.

“I’m like, ‘It doesn’t matter. Watch! Just watch what happens.’ And now they know,” he said. “I think there is still this constant drumbeat of anxiety. All I can say to people is, I have so much anxiety myself about doing a good job on this. Just know I am also very anxious. If you’re anxious about something, I’m probably anxious about it, which means we’re talking about it and thinking about it.”

The series has been both praised and criticized for deviating from the game’s storylines. While most of “The Last of Us” follows the original content closely, including many shot-for-shot copies, certain elements were changed or embellished.

The love story between Frank and Bill in episode 3, “Long, Long, Time,” is one example of the showrunners adding to the existing story to flesh out characters. Many game fans accused it of being unnecessary filler, while others said it gave the series depth.

Mazin said during the press conference that “The Last of Us” season 2 would also be different than Part II of the game. 

“It will be different just as this season was different [from the first game],” he noted. “Sometimes it will be different radically, and sometimes it will be [barely] different at all. But it’s going to be different and it will be its own thing. It won’t be exactly like the game. It will be the show that Neil and I want to make. But we are making it with Bella.”

“The only way we would ever, ever consider re-casting Bella is if she said, ‘I don’t want to work with you guys anymore,'” Druckmann agreed. “And even then, we’re not sure we would grant her that. We might still force her to come back to season 2.”