2008 Woodie Awards
Clinton's a more sensible, experienced candidate
Keenan Havey
Issue date: 2/15/08 Section: Opinion
Originally published: 2/14/08 at 7:08 PM EST
Last update: 2/14/08 at 7:09 PM EST
Come November, I believe Democrats are going to face a tough decision. I like Barack Obama. I also like Hillary Clinton. Both are extremely appealing, albeit controversial candidates.
However, if I had to make a choice I would have to go with Clinton.
Both candidates have similar views on Iraq, stem cell research, net neutrality and gay rights. They are also both opposed to the controversial drilling of the Alaska Wildlife refuge, and promise to address global warming. They do, however, differ on a few important issues.
For one, Clinton takes a stronger stance on environmental issues. For me, this is one deciding factor. Clinton also supports "green collar job training," which would not only make new jobs available, but also go the extra mile to train specialists to address many other environmental issues. I like that.
We need to be aware of environmental problems and what better way to do that than having a job force trained to deal with them? At this point, the conservation/environmental job market is bad. There is little funding where it is most needed, and as a result, the job market and the environment are both suffering.
Clinton's focus on health care is a breath of fresh air. As a person who has been uninsured since turning 21, and has no steady income to pay exorbitant medical bills, staying healthy has been suspenseful. Clinton promises federal universal healthcare, a plan which is promised to gradually improve over time. These are things that need to be done, and sometimes improvements on such a large scale can only be gradual. Obama promises Universal Health care as well, but I don't see his plan as economically viable, at least in this day in age.
As a college student, I also like how Clinton wants to reform the student loan industry. Part of me wants to believe this is a ploy to get the college student vote, but it seems to me that Clinton is driven enough to make good on most her promises, however lofty they may be. Obama is also driven, and a great speaker, but you have to respect Clinton. The lady just won't quit, no matter how much nay-saying she has to put up with. Clinton has been politically active and notable even from her days at Wellesley College, and had an influential role in her husband's presidency.
Obama takes a controversial stance on many issues, such as gun control and the legalization of marijuana. Putting aside how I feel about such things, there is no denying that such seemingly unimportant issues provide a lot of fodder for opponents. Clinton opposes legalization of marijuana, and promotes more "sensible gun control". Clinton's middle of the road leaning is what makes her a more sensible candidate, because in this country, there is nothing a politician can do to please everybody. I feel moderates on both sides come as close as possible. Clinton is a self-described "mind conservative and a heart liberal". To me, this is a good thing. Both extremes of the political spectrum are, well, a bit unrealistic. Let's get someone in the white house who not only has sat on the sidelines of two presidential terms, but has the no-nonsense attitude this country desperately needs.
However, if I had to make a choice I would have to go with Clinton.
Both candidates have similar views on Iraq, stem cell research, net neutrality and gay rights. They are also both opposed to the controversial drilling of the Alaska Wildlife refuge, and promise to address global warming. They do, however, differ on a few important issues.
For one, Clinton takes a stronger stance on environmental issues. For me, this is one deciding factor. Clinton also supports "green collar job training," which would not only make new jobs available, but also go the extra mile to train specialists to address many other environmental issues. I like that.
We need to be aware of environmental problems and what better way to do that than having a job force trained to deal with them? At this point, the conservation/environmental job market is bad. There is little funding where it is most needed, and as a result, the job market and the environment are both suffering.
Clinton's focus on health care is a breath of fresh air. As a person who has been uninsured since turning 21, and has no steady income to pay exorbitant medical bills, staying healthy has been suspenseful. Clinton promises federal universal healthcare, a plan which is promised to gradually improve over time. These are things that need to be done, and sometimes improvements on such a large scale can only be gradual. Obama promises Universal Health care as well, but I don't see his plan as economically viable, at least in this day in age.
As a college student, I also like how Clinton wants to reform the student loan industry. Part of me wants to believe this is a ploy to get the college student vote, but it seems to me that Clinton is driven enough to make good on most her promises, however lofty they may be. Obama is also driven, and a great speaker, but you have to respect Clinton. The lady just won't quit, no matter how much nay-saying she has to put up with. Clinton has been politically active and notable even from her days at Wellesley College, and had an influential role in her husband's presidency.
Obama takes a controversial stance on many issues, such as gun control and the legalization of marijuana. Putting aside how I feel about such things, there is no denying that such seemingly unimportant issues provide a lot of fodder for opponents. Clinton opposes legalization of marijuana, and promotes more "sensible gun control". Clinton's middle of the road leaning is what makes her a more sensible candidate, because in this country, there is nothing a politician can do to please everybody. I feel moderates on both sides come as close as possible. Clinton is a self-described "mind conservative and a heart liberal". To me, this is a good thing. Both extremes of the political spectrum are, well, a bit unrealistic. Let's get someone in the white house who not only has sat on the sidelines of two presidential terms, but has the no-nonsense attitude this country desperately needs.
Be the first to comment on this story