2008 Issues

I think the candidates in the 2008 race should focus on three categories of issues. First and foremost, the candidates must focus on the wavering morality of a government with often questionable policies; for example, the authorization of the torture of prisoners of war to obtain information. Second, they must address economic and social issues that effect American citizens; working on eradicating unnecessary government spending falls under this category, as does the pursuit of a more comprehensive healthcare system. Finally, candidates should focus on foreign policy and issues such as the growing hostility toward the U.S.

Our government must only be involved in foreign affairs as far as it concerns the United States’ own welfare and flourishing, and wars should not be initiated in order to save another nation from tyranny, but foreign policy is still an area of vast importance to any president. Candidates should emphasize the exit strategy for Iraq in their debates and speeches – it would be a shame to have another president who wanted to use military presence as the tool for changing the hearts and minds of an entire nation, and an exit strategy is very necessary at this point. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Iran is, of course, a serious threat to the stability of the Middle East, U.S. ally Israel, and even the U.S. itself. Candidates must make their positions on the issue of Iran and its desire for nuclear weapons clear, and must present ideas for dealing with the threat.

Social and economic issues must obviously be addressed. Over eight million children have no health insurance in the U.S. Nearly 47 million people in total in the U.S. do not have health insurance (Health Insurance Coverage). Candidates must come up with a sensible plan for, at the very least, addressing this issue regarding children. It would be sensible for a candidate to suggest that cutting spending in other areas, such as in Iraq and other military related spending, could help balance the spending on more (though not complete) universal – oriented healthcare (at the very least complete universal healthcare for children in the U.S.). Immigration should be a more predominant issue in the presidential race as well. Candidates should make it clear that efforts must be made toward legalizing illegal aliens already in the U.S., as deporting so many just will not happen by any stretch of the imagination; then, candidates must put thoughtful plans on the table regarding the securing of the border so more illegal aliens do not make it in in the first place.

Most importantly, candidates must address moral shortcomings in the actions of the government. The predominate issue in this category is that of the torturing of prisoners of war. Whether it is water boarding or sleep deprivation, torture of the psyche is still torture, and in many ways it is the essence of the brutality and barbarism of torture. Candidates must make it clear that they will abolish all forms of torture so that our nation can claim civility and a denouncement of brutality and barbarism. An ethical treatment of the human being has nothing to do with infliction of pain where that infliction can and should be avoided.

The candidates should address all of these categories and issues. I understand that a drastic amount of change is hard to achieve under any one term or even two, but certainly damage done by the current administration can be, at least to some extent, reversed. The further addressing of those issues that probably cannot be taken care of in one or two terms, such as the complete deviation from unnecessary spending, should still be present in the race, as intent and effort is often enough to give initiative to future administrations and generations.

“Health Insurance Coverage.” National Coalition on Health Care 17 November, 2007.

2008 Race

Note: I replaced the republican bid blog with my amendment blog, so I will devote a small portion of this blog to naming the candidate I think will most likely be the republican 2008 presidential candidate.

The 2008 race is as unpredictable as ever, with many factors in the mix. The republican field may be dominated by, as usual, all white males, but the democratic field will most likely feature either an African American or a woman candidate. I have previously chosen Hilary Clinton as the most likely candidate for the democratic party, and I will address the bid for the republican party followed by an analysis of who will win between those two.

The republican bid sees either Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani in the candidacy by the end of the GOP convention. I give a slight edge to Mitt Romney. Giuliani has demonstrated he can lean too far left on a number of occasions and issues, most notably that of abortion – he has supported, in the past, the pro – choice position. Some far right Christians, who hold plenty of power in the GOP, are shocked that a republican candidate like Romney can hold to Mormon beliefs, but I doubt this will sway enough voters toward the Giuliani camp, especially because these same ultra – conservative Christians are even more fearful of Giuliani’s stance on abortion. The fact is, Romney’s moral system is very similar to that of any Christian’s, and like most religious people, it is very likely he has accepted religion because he believes he will better himself through it, not because he really believes in every teaching of Mormonism as the ultimate truth. Romney will win the republican bid, if slightly.

Clinton vs. Romney: interesting only because it is the highest level of competition on the earth. Neither are strike anyone as brilliant or head – turningly charismatic or interesting. It is another election of mediocrity.

That said, Clinton does have the edge. Romney is slightly more dull, if only for Clinton’s greater volume and extra passion in speech. Clinton represents change, and no matter what Romney says, America will never see him as a great enough swing away from Bush administration policy; people right now want change, or at least they want to hear someone say they will change things, though in actuality few people are ever bold enough to approve of real change when it’s finally time for business. Lastly, Clinton is a woman; I think this will earn her more votes than some people imagine. If I were part of a society or club of some kind that had elected a woman as president every year of its existence, I would have to vote for a man in the next election no matter what his stance, because of ego. Women may not yet have as great an ego as the man, but culture is quickly changing that. Many women will vote for Clinton because of ego.

It might be tight, but I would lean more toward Clinton with a comfortable win. I’m not calling it a landslide by any stretch of the imagination, but Clinton could win the office with relative ease. I mean Romney won’t feel the need to call for a recount.