I'm Australian so I might refer to Australian policies as I have the most insight into them, and when I say "liberal" I don't mean the slaughtered American definition of the word, but the English definition. From what I've seen I like Kasich the most out of any candidate, but I'd be interested in seeing what your opinions are.
In economics I guess I have New Keynesian and Neoclassical principles. I believe government regulation over business is mostly hurtful but is a very useful tool to remedy market failures. I think the government regulates too much where it shouldn't but too little where it should. For example, I don't think thousands of narrow regulations on the environment (like regulations on car pollution and then separate regulations on energy production and then separate regulations on many other things). I'd prefer to scrap most or all of these regulations (or at least broaden their bases and make them far less specific) and instead impose a broad based carbon tax that is sufficiently high to compensate for the reduced regulations and to have a significantly bigger impact on carbon pollution than all these regulations do currently.
Overall, on spending and revenue, I think the share of GDP of government spending should be significantly lower (currently around 41%), and the tax burden could be lower to (currently around 25% of GDP). This is due to general waste in government spending (due to hurtful regulations and misplaced spending) and inefficient collection of taxes (and they're too high in general).
In relation specific government policy, I am very fond of Singapore's healthcare system; it relies heavily on personal saving funds and mostly relies on the private sector, but with heavy and well formulated government regulation (like minimum coverage options for insurance, much like Australia) such that prices are not too expensive and poorer customers aren't left behind as their insurance is funded or at least partly subsidised by the government depending on income (a more laissez-fair approach to healthcare has proven to create many market failures, much more so than most other industries, thus it requires more regulation). The government also has a generous social safety net for those who can't afford private insurance. On tertiary education, well, the system is fucked like healthcare. Australia's tertiary education system is far superior, although with some problems emerging in recent years (I'm not well educated on other countries' higher education policies though). On welfare, the government does a terrible job and I like the idea of a negative income tax - a simplistic yet effective welfare system which ties in seamlessly with the tax system. On retirement, I'm also very fond of Australia's retirement policy called superannuation (although it does have some caveats which the government is looking at modifying), which basically forces earners to save a proportion of their income in a private pension fund (taxed at a lower rate) - it's similar to Singapore's healthcare fund.
On tax, as with spending, it is too high and too inefficient. Corporate taxes are way too high and for small and medium sized businesses to be internationally competitive and able to innovate (very important) their tax needs to be lowered, which is of great importance to me. Large businesses in general do not face this problem as they have the resources to avoid the terribly formulated tax code that needs to be far simpler. They pay a low effective tax rate (which I think is good) but all businesses should be paying the same or similar effective rate. I have a similar view on personal income taxes (although I don't think income taxes on high income earners are too high, just that they can easily be avoided). Tax on lower income earners needs to be reduced and the tax code simplified in order to reduce evasion by higher income earners. I believe in things like a greater redistributive effort (which is why I support a negative income tax) as opposed to significantly higher minimum wages (although given a negative income tax is pretty much not on any politician's table, I would support a modest increase in the minimum wage to around $12 over a few years such that employment doesn't suffer but the standard of living for low paid workers rises; the American economy can handle this). As I hinted on earlier, I also think the general tax mix should be changed up a bit. I like a broad based sales tax (like New Zealand's GST), though it is regressive, so to compensate, income taxes on lower and middle income earners should be reduced while transfer payments (ie. NIT) should be increased. I am also very fond of a broad based land tax and carbon taxes. All these are very efficient (ie. have the lowest marginal welfare cost) ways of increasing revenue, while a carbon tax would have obvious added benefits unrelated to its efficiency as a tax. But as I said earlier, the tax burden should be reduced, so as these efficient taxes are implemented, less efficient taxes on capital and labour should be reduced significantly.
On social policy, I'm a classical liberal and think that adults ultimately have the right to do whatever they want with their own lives and bodies as long as they are of sound mind and the decision is well informed. I support same sex marriage. I support unfettered abortion up to about 25 weeks because I believe we should define the start of life (when brain activity becomes sustained) as the opposite as the undisputed definition of death (the cessation of sustained brain activity), and after that it should be restricted to rape victims and mothers whose lives are in danger. I don't support affirmative action due to my strong beliefs in a meritocracy. I have a strong dislike for "nanny-state" laws (like jaywalking, compulsory bicycle helmets (although only Australia and NZ have helmet laws)).
On drugs, I'm very liberal. I think cannabis should be legalised much like alcohol or tobacco, but with more cautious regulations (despite my classical liberal views I think government has the duty to regulate cannabis more heavily due to the fact that it can be addictive for some users and that the long term health effects aren't fully known, thus making the decision of consuming cannabis not a fully free or informed one) and lower excise taxes (to reduce the size of the black market which is the already established market with economies of scale etc - once they are diminished then we can increase taxes, much like after prohibition of alcohol ended). The main regulations I'd like are banning advertising (like tobacco), edibles (like banning flavoured cigarettes, at least in Australia, as they appeal to children even if advertising is banned), and taxing based on potency. For drugs that are in my opinion are "middle of the road" like psychedelics and MDMA, they should be manufactured by government and available for purchase from pharmacies or government retailers after a mandatory interview with a doctor who provides all information on the drugs, how to use them, and harm reduction methods etc. Harder drugs like meth, cocaine, heroin and all that should be available for free (again produced by government) in centres where users are medically supervised and addicts can be put on treatment plans.
I realise I may have given too much information. Anyway, enjoy my political doctrine.