The South Asian Friends of Obama (SAFO) claimed victory with Obama and his campaign this past Thursday in
Motivated by the recent
Read the full article here and check out SAFO's site here.
The South Asian Friends of Obama (SAFO) claimed victory with Obama and his campaign this past Thursday in
Motivated by the recent
Read the full article here and check out SAFO's site here.
For some, the principal litmus test for their selection for President is a candidate’s view on abortion. For others, their selection of President is contingent on a candidate’s moral values and/or executive experience. What we look for in a Presidential candidate is worth big money. Political strategists on each campaign staff are aggressively trying to understand what the public wants in a Presidential candidate, and are investing huge amounts of dollars to identify the most desirable Presidential qualities.
The science of decision-making and sociology are highly complex and variable. A multi-disciplinary model, one which includes economics, political science, and psychology, helps strategists understand how people come to make decisions. The common denominator is the study of human behavior and decision-making—precisely what political strategists, pundits, and commentators are assessing in a highly complex matrix. With that in mind, what factors do you take into consideration when choosing the candidate of your choice? Here is my generic ‘Presidential Test’ for you to consider. The test attempts to identify the strong qualities of a candidate given the current social and political condition of the country. The five-step test should be applied in sequential order and considers each candidate outside of his party or political persuasion. Of course, there can be plenty of other tests applied—can you think of any? The strategists and pundits are listening!
1) Which Presidential candidate offers the most convincing evidence and opinion of the condition of our country today?
2) Which Presidential candidate offers the best vision of where our country is headed, or where he/she would like the country to go?
3) Has the candidate delivered on a vision he/she presents, in his/her current job or in a former position?
4) Does the candidate offer any ‘value-added’ agenda or scheme that separates him/her from other candidates in relation to how the candidate addresses foreign policy?
5) Has the candidate left his/her current position in a better position than when he/she first entered the position? i.e. if a candidate is currently a senator or governor, how has the senator’s district fared, or governor’s state progressed over the course of the candidate’s term?
Given these five tests for a good President, who comes out on top? Which candidate is your winner at this time?
Raj Verma, JD/MPA
Blog Contributor
Although the Clinton Camp was quick to respond in this story by the AP
"It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'" Shaheen said. "There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It's hard to overcome."
"Senator Clinton is out every day talking about the issues that matter to the American people. These comments were not authorized or condoned by the campaign in any way," spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said.Ofcourse the Obama camp thinks completely differently on the whole discussion:
"Hillary Clinton said attacking other Democrats is the fun part of this campaign, and now she's moved from Barack Obama's kindergarten years to his teenage years in an increasingly desperate effort to slow her slide in the polls. Senator Clinton's campaign is recycling old news that Barack Obama has been candid about in a book he wrote years ago, and he's talked about the lessons he's learned from these mistakes with young people all across the country. He plans on winning this campaign by focusing on the issues that actually matter to the American people."I think what you are seeing here in this whole case is the Clinton Camps worst nightmare. Clinton was comfortable in the early lead and it seemed that Obama's big message was not resonating with voters in the early states. Although Clintons lead remains strong in National Polls the recent slip ups in Iowa and New Hampshire are of big concern and the only challenge she can really provide is on experience. The voters seem to be choosing the voice of change and hope over the voice of experience and the Clinton campaign really have no way to fight back Obama.
Currently the attention in the Presidential race seems to be all focused on the Iowa and New Hampshire caucuses, but they are also giving an indication of what could be the VP derby that will soon follow the nomination process.
If Senator Clinton, Obama or Edwards become the Democratic nominees the following names are rising to the top of the betting pool:
Sen. Evan Bayh: from the Midwest and has a background as a Governor and a successful Senator in a Republican state and he has been campaigning for Sen. Clinton since he withdrew from the election
Governor Bill Richardson: A Hispanic Presidential Candidate and from the Mountain states that are now in clear play for both parties
Governor Tom Vilsack: He has been very active with Sen. Clinton in Iowa and also has a great personal story and will not overshadow the Presidential candidate
Senator Joe Biden: He definitely bolsters any Presidential candidates Foreign policy credentials
Senator Jim Webb: Strong Military background, former Republican, from a Republican state also very symbolic over his victory over Mark Allen
Governor Mark Warner: Attractive candidate who won in a Republican state and is very popular in Virginia and could bring that state to the Democrats
There are many other candidates and as the picks of Sen. Lieberman, Dan Quayle tell us there are some surprising candidates that are not talked about a lot but could surprise us like Gov. Martin O'Malley from Maryland, Harold Ford Jr., Gov. Schweitzer from Montana.
Who else could be a VP for any one of these candidates?
The Race Behind the Race
There can only be one winner. Well, usually. On its face, the debates showcase competing egos and differing ideologies all with the aim of securing the most powerful position in American government. A subtle look at the presidential debates reveals a different race for other coveted posts, and is something to debate about. As you watch the Presidential debates and discuss the various differences on foreign policy, domestic issues, and character traits, be aware that some of those on stage are vying for desirable and high-impact positions in the winner’s administration. If the polls, at this point, suggest that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination and gain the Presidential nomination, does candidate Bill Richardson return as Secretary of Energy? Will Edwards be appointed to a post in the administration? Perhaps