Tuesday, August 14, 2007

The Elections of 2008

The Elections of 2008

The elections of 2008 are quickly approaching us, and it is time we consider the candidates running and who we may vote for. I myself will be a first-time voter, and I will just make the primaries by about five days (I turn 18 about five days before the primaries). I am trying to pay close attention the candidates, to know who seems most trustworthy, and who seems to be the best leader for this nation. Soon, I will be issuing my official support for one of the candidates.
It seems weird that a year and a half from now, our President will not be a Bush. However it might be a Clinton. Hillary Clinton is certainly one of the leaders in the race for President, but does she have what it takes to pull of the election? Or will she even be able to make it out of the primaries?
The election, with still several more months until even the primaries begin, has already been one filled with action, and change from original speculations. Barack Obama was not considered a serious candidate until about the beginning of the campaign trail. He soon jumped up into a dead-heat race with none other than Hillary Clinton. Two and a half years ago, it was John McCain who thought to have a pretty comfortable victory for the Republican Party. Rudy Giuliani was given a shot, but only behind Senator McCain. Now, Giuliani is the "sure favorite" to win, and John McCain has fallen behind dramatically.
But this puts Giuliani in a "no win" situation. Sure, he is the favorite to win. But that puts him in more media spotlight, and has more room for sensibility to his opinions. The best that can happen is that he gains more votes and wins anyway. For a lesser candidate, the worst is that he loses votes, and loses anyway. Giuliani is in the position that McCain was in, Hillary Clinton is in, and the position Howard Dean was in about four years ago- before he blew it.
McCain, when in second behind Giuliani, was also in a no-win situation. He was in worse of a situation that Giuliani is in now. At least now, Giuliani can hold on to his lead and win. McCain was being cancelled out by Giuliani. Giuliani’s tough character, and McCain’s small chances of beating Clinton, would make it nearly impossible for McCain to beat Giuliani. He might could cancel out Giuliani, but that would cancel him out too, giving rise to another person- likely Mitt Romney.
Now McCain has gone down hill severely. He is not even in the position to beat cancel out Giuliani. Now, that role has been placed on Romney- the slick, tough, Mormon carrying much momentum. Does this put Mitt Romney in the same ‘‘no win’’ position as McCain was in? I think that Mitt Romney can handle this better than McCain. He might could pull out and beat Guiliani. However if these two get put in heated debates, don’t be surprised to see the election fall into an all-out up for grabs amongst nearly all of the candidates. You could see someone like Sam Brownback, Ron Paul, or Mike Huckabee come make a surprise run into the primaries, similar to how John Kerry did in 2004.
The Democratic race is very similar. Hillary Clinton is in the same position as Giuliani is in. She has held her ground for much longer, but is now under great pressure from Obama. Is she going to be able to hold on to the lead, or will she give it up to Obama? Or, could they both cancel each other out giving rise to a John Edwards?
Barack Obama, though maybe a little better, is in a similar situation to what John McCain was in. Barack Obama’s bright young face, and slick rhetoric is what is keeping him in longer than John McCain. However Clinton has one thing that Obama does not have. As journalist Josh Rutledge points out, "She [Hillary Clinton] can get away with acting like a jerk and trying to smear him [Barack Obama]. Obama can’t." Hillary Clinton might could use this to her advantage. This could probably take away Barack Obama’s changes. However it is a chance for Clinton as well. She could mess up and cancel both her and Obama out, or, Obama could come back with a counter attack and cancel out Clinton. It may already be a lost cause for Obama, but this could put John Edwards in as sure of a position as ever to win the Democratic primaries. He is slick, and has "been there done that" unlike both Obama and Clinton. For Obama to stand a chance, he must continue to be slick, and careful. Furthermore, he probably needs a mistake or two from Hillary Clinton. Both are very possible, but for them both to happen is unlikely.
It is possible that both of these candidates, Clinton and Obama, could beat their way down to the level of John Edwards, or, that Edwards could meet somewhere in the middle with Clinton and Obama. This could turn into a dead-heated race between the three of them. If they then all cancelled each other out, though, the Democratic primaries could turn into a dead-heat between all of the candidates. Candidates such as Joe Biden, Chris Dodden, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich, who once thought to have no chance, may have a chance after all.
Any of the candidates, really, still hold a shot at winning- just in their own way. Each candidate brings something that the other candidates are lacking, and thus, will receive some votes. A year ago, many people, including myself to a degree, thought that this could be the year that a third party candidate makes a run- maybe not winning, but perhaps deciding the election, or gains a considerable number of votes in consideration of being a third party candidate. That is still possible, but it is probably next to irrelevant in the primaries. It is probably a little more noticeable from the Republican side, where the candidates are a little more spread out. The moderate Republicans will probably take Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney; the conservative, fundamental Republicans will probably take Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, or Fred Thompson; the more Libertarian Republicans will probably take Ron Paul. Once again, McCain, who was once the leader, is more or less left out.
Ron Paul himself is an interesting candidate. If you look on the internet, you might think that he is the leading candidate. However if you watch the news, you may hear Guiliani’s name one hundred times before you hear "Ron Paul." Ron Paul calls himself the "True Republican." But yet many Republican’s disown him. He is against the war, he is not for a Federal drug war, and he is not for the Federal banning of abortion. He wants to return the gold standard, which is something too radical and "out there" for both Democrats and Republicans. He is not for a national ID card, and he is not for regulating the internet. Looking at these things, it is easy to see why modern-day Republicans, conservative and moderate, disown him.
But he does offer many conservative ideologies that other Republican candidates are not willing to offer- many things that would be a conservative’s dream. He is a proclaimed Christian. Sure, any candidate could say that, but this goes for all candidates. If you question Paul (who by the way, as we’ll see is the most consistent voter), then you must question every other proclaimed Christian running for President (and every one in the world as well). He is for tougher border security, which is something many Republicans do not like about Bush at the moment. He is for low taxes, and has never voted to raise taxes. He has been called the "tax-payers best friend." He says he will protect your rights to bear arms. He is perhaps the most consistent candidates in voting, as far as not "flip-flopping." He is pro-life. (He is not so much for a Federal ban on abortion, but he would support the ban at the state level). As far as returning to the gold standard, he simply wants to be able to back up any money in circulation with gold- something with true value in itself. This would reduce inflation, help get America out of debt, and probably lower the prices on many goods. None of these things are bad. When gold does not back up money, the government spends money like a credit card. The next generation must pay that credit card bill. He is a strict constructionist in viewing the Constitution, and pledges to uphold it. He would probably be the most Libertarian of conservatives, but also probably the most conservative of the Libertarians. Conservative hero Ronald Reagan said that "The very heart and soul of conservatism is Libertarianism."
Paul probably should campaign on the conservative issues more if wants any chance at winning. He probably needs a lot of help by other candidate’s mistakes, but plenty can happen in five or six months. If nothing else, he might affect the way other candidates run and campaign, and might bring a little different twist to the Republican Party. I also think out of the lesser candidates, Ron Paul is probably the most underrated. He has raised more money than a lot of candidates, but has not spent all that much of it. The internet is also serving as a big help to Paul.
As of to date, Fred Thompson has not made his campaign official, but most people believe it is definite that he will run. Many people consider him real conservative. However after comparing voting records, Ron Paul seems more fiscally conservative than Fred Thompson is. Still out of those who have a good chance to win the Republican nomination, Fred Thompson is probably the most conservative.
There are still many more of the "lesser" candidates from both sides- Tom Tacnredo, Bill Richardson, Mike Huckabee, etc. Tom Tancredo is conservative from the standpoint of tougher immigration laws. He also shows support for school choice. But his main issue is tougher immigration, and as a result, many people view him as a "one-sided candidate." Mike Huckabee, being a former Baptist Minister, might gain some Christian votes. But he has not made as much of a name for himself as someone like Fred Thompson. The Democratic race is pretty uniform compared to the Republican side, but every of the lesser candidates should be ready to take the leading position if Clinton, Obama, and Edwards cancelled each other out.
In the bottom line, both the Republican and Democratic races are open. Sure, the chances of the general election being between Ron Paul and Bill Richardson is slimmer than a sheet of paper. However every candidate on both sides brings something that others are missing. Overall, I continue to give the edge of Giuliani over McCain (I have said this for a while, and it seems to be coming true). I still give the edge to Clinton over Obama, although Obama will probably make more of a run than McCain could on Giuliani. I’m not so sure if Obama’s bright face and slick rhetoric can carry him past Clinton. It would take a Clinton mistake. Obama’s mistake may have been running this year in the first place. Four or eight years from now, he could be nearly unbeatable. For some, such as McCain, and Ron Paul, this may be their last chance, given their old ages. Also, another question to be asked that has not been asked in this article, is "Who are potential running mates?" Probably most of the people running for President would be, as well as others such as Jeb Bush of Florida, former Vice President Al Gore, or possibly even Bob Riley of Alabama. It’s also never too early to ask, "Who could be running in 2012?" Could we see Condoleezza Rice run? Jeff Sessions? Al Gore? Dick Durbin? Or even Roy Moore? Only time will tell, and for now, it is probably best to focus on this election.
As for my prediction, I predict that Rudy Giuliani will carry home the Republican nomination. I do not see McCain catching back up. I do not see Mitt Romney able to pull it off either- being Mormon may get him the mid-west, but Giuliani will probably take a lot of the Southeast, as well as most of the Northeast. I also do not see any other lesser candidate such as Paul, Huckabee, or Tancredo making a strong enough move in to win. As for the Democrats, I must pick also the front runner, Hillary Clinton. I do not see Barack Obama beating Clinton, nor do I see Edwards able to hang on long enough to beat Clinton. Furthermore, I am not sure if another candidate could come in and make a surprise move on her either. I can see Giuliani picking Fred Thompson as his running mate, and I can see Clinton either picking Obama or Al Gore for hers. Don’t take my word as definite, though, because in the world of politics, anything can happen.
Here are some interesting articles on the election (these may be outdated, and may seem somewhat irrelevant at certain points):
An Obama Mistake by Josh Rutledge- http://daygrind.blogspot.com/2007/01/obama-mistake.html
Santa Obama by Josh Rutledge- http://daygrind.blogspot.com/2006/12/santa-obama.html
The Race for 2008 by Ryan Hampton- http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=77069405&blogID=272410164

UPCOMING BLOGS: In my next blog, we will take a different and unique look at evolution. How could Charles Darwin’s theories be applied to Christian theology, and make the Christian faith stronger? My next blog will take an interesting look at that. I also plan to post a blog showing my official support for a candidate. I already have a good idea who it is- I just need a little more time to make sure I want to make this support official. Harry Potter- is this a book of wickedness, satanic worship, and magic? Is this a good book that can give us a new way of approaching the Bible? Or is it somewhere in between? I plan to post a blog on this popular book and movie series sometime soon. Also, with college football quickly approaching, I would like to post a blog on my thoughts of this upcoming college football season. I don’t have long to do that either! Check in, if you’d like, to these upcoming posts!
Thanks! In Christ,
Ryan

No comments: