It isn't laziness, he hasn't made them as a part of his campaign.
he doesn't emphasize specific policy positions in his stump speech in the way sanders, as an example, does. but he takes questions from the public and the press at pretty much every event he does. he avoids specifics on a few issues, but generally answers questions as directly as any politician i've ever seen.
he doesn't have an issue section on his website yet, but only a couple of candidates do. it's still very early in the campaign.
(who the hell is going to go on record as being someone who doesn't want to bring the troops home from Afghanistan?), drug policy, etc.
trump just caught all sorts of crap for talking about doing so. as far as i can tell the bipartisan consensus is that it would be irresponsible to withdraw troops from afghanistan.
Did you post this to show that he might be a policy lightweight? Did you see the line in there about him making these votes without an on the record explanation at the time or since?
i posted it to show katkid that beto has an extended record of being pretty extreme in opposition to intervention in almost all situations, even ones where his party was almost unanimous in supporting it.
not many people were terribly interested in how beto voted before he ran for the senate. one of the interesting (at least to me) things about beto is that he put together a six year record in the house acting like a completely unambitious lifer-to-be, mostly avoiding publicity, concentrating on constituent services, voting for district issues, and quietly breaking from consensus on a few pet issues (especially, immigration, drugs, interventionism). and then, kinda out of nowhere, he took on a suicide race for the senate and then decided to run for president.
i think he'd promised to only serve eight years when he ran his first campaign for the house, so perhaps the senate run was related to fulfilling that promise. still unusual, i think.