Super Tuesday is tomorrow. In the past I have skipped the primaries mostly because they where irrelevant as the nominees had already been decided at that point. This year that is no longer the case. Also, this year is probably the most important election in decades as the ship of state is seriously damaged from the Bush years and the person that is put in charge can either finishes the job or right it.
With the previous month's worth of primaries, the choices have narrowed down to five, three on Republican side and two on the Democrat. For me, the choice is easy on which party to vote for. The Republican candidates, without invoking the word "Bush", have made it pretty clear that they believe in his policies, just not in the execution. Essentially they think they can do what he did only better. The fundamental problem is I don't agree with what he did and believes. I think continue his policies are the worse thing that can be done to this country right now. Obama is right; change is needed, not more of the same done differently which is exactly what the Republican candidates proudly represent.
So for me that narrows the choices down to two - Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Most people seem to make choices based on popularity or "personality". What they believe, their platform is important, but I could care less if everyone else likes the person, of if they are even a likable person, sadly though it is important to others. I want them to be able to lead, to truly recognize that leadership is more then a title (something Bush doesn't). Leadership means making the right decisions, for the right reasons, while knowing they could become wrong. A leader should inspire but they should also establish how things can and should be done. Just as important, a leader can admit to failure, admit they don't know the best course of actions and recognize that so they can find experts that can. I don't mind hearing "I don't know" as long as I hear "but I will find the people that can make sure I do." I want a leader that recognizes the last thing they need is a bunch of sycophants. An egomaniac surrounded by yes-men, who refuses to believe he is capable of being wrong, has done more, then enough damage to this country. Finally, a leader, a President, must be effective. Good ideas with no means or will to implement them are of no help to anyone.
All these traits cannot exist independent of each other. A President can lead, but he has to inspire those to want to follow. He can be effective, but only if people like them enough to let them. A leader can admit failure, but they can't be weak in the process. It’s all a delicate and difficult line. It requires intelligence, skill, a touch of humility, and a whole lot of luck with good people backing them up.
Based on this belief in what a President should mean, I can only do that classic pro/con list for each Democratic candidate based on these key qualifications: platform, likeability, leadership, decision-making, inspiration, humility, effectiveness and support staff.
Platform
In this the two candidates are nearly alike. Both may disagree on implementation but on core areas they agree. Where they diverge from each other is the Iraq War where Clinton has indicated she wants to leave but is still wants to strive for the solution that isn't embarrassing for the United States. A solution that does not exist. Barack seems to recognize that failure can, and is, an option when it comes to getting out of the Iraq War. Something I agree with.
However, Hillary Clinton seems to recognize that the middle class is the US economy. When the middle class stumbles, so does the economy. Barack has indicated interest, but I don't think he really understands just how important the middle class is. Also, while both have health care reform plans, I don't think either have good plans but Hillary has the passion to get something out there. Right now anything is better then what the country has now.
The two candidates do diverge from me on issues, one is immigration. I think amnesty should be off the table, I think the border should be closed and I think existing laws should be enforced strictly with financial support from the federal government (the biggest problem right now). Neither candidate agrees, but then neither does the Republican ones. I also think that welfare reform is necessary, one that enforces diminishing returns for the longer someone is on it and the larger their family gets while under it.
Winner: Clinton
Likeability
I disagree with the notion that liking someone is that important to measure the skill or abilities, but others disagree and often it’s critical to getting anything done. This results in a hit to ability to inspire and prove effective in getting things done.
In this, the winner is pretty clear. Hillary is a polarizing candidate; you either love her or hate her. For reasons I don’t understand, there doesn’t seem to exist an in between. With Barack, people love him. He crosses political, racial, age and sex boundaries. In this area he is truly the universal candidate. It’s his likeability factor that makes him the worse case scenario for the Republicans as they will not be able to defeat him.
Winner: Obama
Decision-Making
A President has to be able to make good, consistent decisions, even if it will cost lives. Its really a two part thing – one part is experience, the other the willingness to make the unpopular decision for the right reasons.
With experience comes the ability to recognize the complexity and the consequences of a decision. As we saw with Bush, he utterly failed to do this at every turn. He truly simplified everything to an “A vs B” type mentality that fails to recognize the problems that can arise because usually much more is involved. With this experience also comes ability to weather a storm, to know to seek out more information and advice and hopefully far less pride on ones choices (again see Bush). It is here where you essentially want the anti-Bush.
On this, Hillary clearly wins out. She has the 8 years in the White House, years as a Senator, years supporting her husband as governor. She truly has the wealth of experience. Obama has two years as a Senator; most of it really spent campaigning for that seat and then the Presidency. He is a rookie and we have absolutely no idea about his decision making skills. With him it’s a far greater leap of faith then normal.
In the second criteria – making the unpopular decisions, I believe it is a wash. The days of the self-sacrificing politician for the common good are dead and unlikely to return with either candidate.
Winner: Clinton
Inspirational
An excellent President inspires people to want to do more for themselves and their country. In this Barack has no equal. His oratory skills are simply amazing. His speech writers are apparently some of the best in the world. In this area, Clinton doesn’t stand a chance, which is probably why her message is based on her experience.
Winner: Obama
Humility
As said before, a President has to admit they can be wrong and will not know everything. If you think your right all the time, you only surround yourself with sycophants; this usually results in bad choices.
This is a tough one. Barack hasn’t indicated any humility mainly because his lack of experience hasn’t presented an opportunity for him to. I don’t know with him. However, with Hillary Clinton, it’s pretty clear that she doesn’t have much. She still, after all this time, can’t even admit she made the wrong call about Iraq. When asked directly she gives this very long song and dance that can be summed up as “yes I was wrong” but it seems she is incapable of saying the words. Not exactly confidence builder for me.
Winner: none
Support Staff
This is important mostly because we have seen what happens when the President doesn’t have good people working with him. You name an important position in government and you probably have an unqualified sycophant that Bush put there. A President, to a large degree, is only as good as the people that represent them on various matters.
On this, again I don’t know. Barack’s inexperience means he doesn’t really know who is good and who isn’t. We know he recognizes good speech writing talent when he sees it, but that’s all we know. However, his ability to inspire may lead to him truly getting some of the best to stand up and take roles they normally wouldn’t but should. It’s a huge variable with a great deal of potential and a great deal of danger.
Clinton has the experience; she probably already knows who will do what once she takes office. How many are political only and how much are for effectiveness is the real variable. I have confidence that the government situation will improve, but compared to Bush that really isn’t much of a high bar to go over.
Winner: none
Effectiveness
Can a President get his agenda passed. Say what you will, Bush was very effective is getting his agenda done, thanks to a Congress that agreed with anything and everything. This is why the current crop of Republican candidates is not good choices as they are part of that group that enabled the President. The next president will not have it nearly as easy.
The next President has lot of damage to undo and their ability to do that is directly tied into how well others, especially Congress, will work with them. It brings all the above qualities together. A platform that people can get behind, a personality that people are willing to support, the experience and skill to make trusted, good decisions for the people of the United States and the world, the ability to inspire people to want to follow and finally the ability to seek out help and find the best to hold the roles of government to get decisions executed, all of will help or hinder their effectiveness.
Again, it’s almost to close to call. The ultimate President would be a combination of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Her experience and connections combined with his likeability and inspirations abilities. Sadly that is not the case. I want to call this category a wash, but it’s simply too critical for that.
In the end, Obama simply doesn’t have the experience, connections, or agenda to become an effective President. One year as a Senator simply isn’t enough. We all experienced the disaster of inexperience with Bush, we can’t repeat the mistake. He has developed connections and will develop more, but he needs that experience under his belt to recognize the good from the bad. He pushes for “change” but that seems to be the beginning and the end of his plans. He can’t seem to explain what changes he wants, only what he doesn’t want. He follows the Kerry platform of “I have plans”, but I want to know what those plans are. Hillary has all these things and then some. She has plans. Boring plans, hard to explain plans, but at least she has some ideas and knows that communicating them is hard, but willing to try.
Winner: Clinton
Obama is the leap of faith choice and Clinton is the practical choice. I am a practical man and with a score of 3-2-2 come tomorrow, I am voting for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee for President.
No comments:
Post a Comment