US Presidential Election Candidates

Hillary Clinton could be among the Democratic Party's most likely candidates to win the 2008 elections. With a number of opinion polls released giving her top ratings—better in fact, than some of the other more senior, experienced candidates in the race—America may be on its way to having the first lady president sworn in, in her history.

Read the rest of this entry ... (202 words left)

Republican Mitt Romney has repeatedly flip flopped on some key issues. In doing so, he has only proved how easily he can let go of his principles in his bid for power. Or does it indicate that he simply does not have any principles to speak of?

For instance, in 1994, during his earlier, unsuccessful run for Massachusetts governor against Democrat Ted Kennedy, Romney projected himself as being committed to a pro-choice policy. Subsequently, in 2002, while running again for Massachusetts governor, Romney remained an ardent supporter of women's right to choose. But later Romney changed his position. He now calls for doing away with the Roe v. Wade ruling that would allow individual states to define their own abortion policies.

Romney similarly reversed his reformist views with regard to gay rights. After declaring himself staunchly in support of equal rights for gays in 1994—a position he retained even in 2002—he suddenly changed his stance and declared marriage out of bounds for gay couples.  

Another issue is federal funding for stem cell research. In 2005, Romney held a position that favored state sponsored embryonic stem cell research, saying, "I believe stem cell research is important for our state and for our nation." However, he subsequently shifted to a more conservative stance, and opposed funding for research involving embryonic stem cells.

The ideal candidate for the post of president will be a leader who can take tough decisions. For this, he would need to have a strong internal value system. More importantly, he would need to have the mettle required to stand his ground. Such strong leadership is even more important today, when one considers the threats facing America. Romney may be a capable executive with the ability to get work done quickly. However, his compulsive flip flopping has proven that he lacks the moral fiber required to steer the nation during these difficult times.

Former Arkansas governor, Republican Mike Huckabee's campaign may be haunted by the ghost of rapist Wayne Dumond. While Dumond died in prison in 2005, Huckabee's rivals are reviving the controversy surrounding the 'special' efforts put in by Huckabee to grant parole for Dumond.

Freeing Dumond was a mistake, as the rapist went on to rape and kill two other women in Northwest Arkansas and in West Missouri. Huckabee himself has however, denied responsibility for freeing Dumond. He has consistently underplayed his role in the affair, saying that the process of granting Dumond parole was started by his Democratic predecessors, namely Jim Tucker and Bill Clinton, and that he merely supported Dumond's eligibility for being paroled.

However, media reports, including a 2002 article by Murray Waas in the Arkansas Times suggest otherwise. According to them, Huckabee, along with his key aide, went out of their way to lobby Dumond's case. Huckabee, it was alleged, was guilty of acting in a manner that deviated from accepted parole practice, including having an unrecorded closed-door meeting with the Post Prison Transfer Board, informally known as the parole board, to make Dumond's release possible. Some former parole board members have corroborated the facts stated in these stories, for instance that the board. One of them, Deborah Springer Suttlar, observed that Huckabee's appearance before the board was responsible for causing the voting amongst board members, which was against Dumond's, to turn in favor of it. Questioning why this should have happened, Suttlar has been quoted as saying, "The board members knew the governor’s position. And Huckabee knows what influence a governor has over a board. Who’s going to turn down a governor?” Seems like Huckabee will have a lot of explaining to do if he is to retain his position in the race for presidentship.

Mike Huckabee has often drawn criticism for being weak on illegal immigration. In 2005, as Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee had supported a bill that proposed to make children of illegal immigrants eligible for scholarships and in-state college tuition. His argument in favor of the bill was that it would allow children who had completed their schooling in Arkansas to have the same opportunities as their peers. It would also ensure, he maintained, that a child was not punished—by being denied educational opportunities that he deserved on academic merit, only because of his illegal status—for a crime committed by his parents.

While the bill was never passed, Huckabee's decision to support it was questioned. In 2007, when he was asked about it during a Republican presidential debate, Huckabee defended the bill on the following grounds:

a)     The bill required stringent conditions and applied only to a student who had schooled in Arkansas from the age of five to six years onwards.

b)     The student would need to have been an A-plus student, with an exceptional record, who had completed the core-curriculum.

c)     He had a drug- and alcohol-free record.

d)     He had to apply for citizenship."

However Huckabee was lying. As reported on www.politifact.com, the original bill only required that the student should have gone to an Arkansas high school for three years and graduated, and that they had to sign an affidavit to the effect that they intended to pursue citizenship.

Republican candidate John McCain has done a volte-face—this time on ethanol. McCain has always made his opposition to ethanol clear. While campaigning in 1999 and 2000, his message was clear: ethanol is not worth it. During a republican debate in Iowa, a major corn growing state, he advocated doing away with subsidies for ethanol. "Ethanol subsidies should be phased out…we don’t need ethanol subsidies. It doesn’t help anybody.” In 2003, he went even further. "Ethanol is a product that would not exist if Congress didn't create an artificial market for it. No one would be willing to buy it," he said. "Yet thanks to agricultural subsidies and ethanol producer subsidies, it is now a very big business—tens of billions of dollars that have enriched a handful of corporate interests—primarily one big corporation, ADM. Ethanol does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality."

McCain's voting record has also consistently reflected his views on the subject. In2003, McCain voted against the Energy Omnibus Bill. Later in 2005, he voted against the Environmental Effects Caused by Ethanol Amendment. He also voted against the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

Then, around 2006, he changed his stance completely. Speaking, again in Iowa, he enthusiastically supported the use for ethanol. "I support ethanol, he said, "and I think it is vital, a vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects."

So far, while McCain has undoubtedly changed his tone, he has not backed it with any pledge for active support. However, the question arises, why this change of heart towards ethanol?

John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate has created for himself a dubious reputation for doublespeak. His 2008 Presidential campaign is littered with flip-flops. Here are some more, as the list continues:
 

• In 1983, McCain was against declaring a holiday to commemorate Martin Luther King, Jr. Later he supported it.
  
  
• McCain publicly opposed Republican strategist Grover Norquist. However, subsequently he changed his position towards him.
  
  
• In 2000, McCain spoke out against businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly, both major contributors to Bush's presidential campaign. He alleged that the brothers had violated campaign finance laws. However, recently he retracted and approached them for support.
  
  
• In 2000, McCain opposed Bush for campaigning at Bob Jones University saying his doing so amounted to his endorsing the school's racist policies. “If I were there, I would condemn openly the policies of Bob Jones because I would want to make sure that everybody knew that this kind of thing is not American,” he had said. However, subsequently he reversed his stance, and was open to considering a speaking invitation from the school.
  
  
• McCain also flip flopped, splendidly, on the issue of promotion by the state of the Confederate flag.
  
  
• In 2000, McCain rubbished the utility of ethanol and was publicly against granting any subsidies in its favor. Subsequently he acknowledged it as a "vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects".
  

Ron Paul's growing support, as recorded by various opinion polls, seems due, at least in part, to an increasing disillusionment being felt by the average voter towards most candidates, both Republicans and Democrats. In such a scenario, the American voter may see Paul as a more acceptable alternative.

Paul is a Constitutionalist, who does not believe in voting for anything that is not authorized by the constitution. As a result, he has consistently voted against prickly issues such as the military escalation in Iraq, or federal spending. He has stuck to his pledge of never voting for increase in taxes and advocated abolishing federal income tax. In fact, it his voting record that has earned him the title of 'Dr. No'.

As a qualified obstetrician, Paul believes life begins at conception and maintains a pro-life stand. Nevertheless, he believes decisions regarding maternal and fetal health should be taken at the state level, and that federal bans infringe upon the rights of the states to make laws.

Paul is loyal to the creed of 'principled libertarianism', with its firm belief in a smaller, less intrusive system of government that would enable citizens to live and seek fulfillment according to their choice. His call for constitutionally limited government has been well received. The views he holds may be working in Paul's favor. At a time when there is a perceivable shift in trend towards a libertarian ethos, Paul's candidature seems to be sending the right signals.

John McCain, the Republican candidate running for Presidentship, has gained notoriety for being a flip flopper—he has consistently changed his views and opinions on a number of issues of national interest.

One such issue, over which he has frequently changed his position on, is Iraq. There was a time when McCain spoke in favor of redeployment of troops in Iraq. While conceding that there were no 'good options,' McCain proposed withdrawing troops to the borders, and maintaining bases in Kuwait and other countries, to try to stem interference from other countries.

Then, suddenly, he retracted his stand, saying that under no scenario would troops be withdrawn, even if the escalation efforts failed. He said withdrawal of troops would be considered only when “we have the situation under control”.

McCain has also criticized Vice President Cheney's view that there have been enormous successes in Iraq. He said he "bitterly disagreed" with what he called the "failed strategy", and claimed that this had been his position over the last three years. However, this is in sharp contrast to views he had expressed earlier. Only about a year ago, in 2005, he had said in an interview, “I think the situation on the ground is going to improve. I do think that progress is being made in a lot of Iraq. Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course. If I thought we weren’t making progress, I’d be despondent."

Republican Ron Paul is once again in the race for president. He ran earlier in 1988, and managed to garner almost 400,000 votes. What are the strong points in his campaign?

Paul enjoys a wide support base, including libertarians, conservative Republicans, and some anti-war Democrats. The former flight surgeon has built up a reputation for integrity. He is believed to always cast his vote to uphold the constitution, something that is rare in today's politics.

Paul voted against the war in Iraq, stating that such a war would not be constitutional. This comes in sharp contrast to most other politicians, republicans and democrats, who not only supported President Bush's call for war on Iraq, but favored continuance of troop presence in that country.

Going on to other issues, Paul voted against the Patriot Act. He stands for abolishing income tax and the IRS. He has also opposed controversial trade agreements such as CAFTA and FTAA. He has opposed the Bush government's war on drugs, advocating that decisions with regard to the use of medical marijuana should be left to individual states. He also supports the freedom of the internet.

However, Paul comes across as weak on certain other important key issues. He rejects the idea that that climate change is a result of human activity, and consequently, his campaign is weak on an environmental policy. He has voted for offshore drilling, as well as drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Besides, he also supports ending subsidies and special benefits to energy companies. Paul has also come under criticism for holding racist views.

Will the 2008 presidential elections see Hillary Clinton being elected as the first lady President of the United States? Political watchers say they would not be surprised. She is, after all, an astute political player, has the charm, and, what's more, enjoys considerable support amongst her Democratic base.

Read the rest of this entry ... (190 words left)

His '9/11 campaign' seems to have ensured Rudy Giuliani's position at the top of opinion polls for the most likely Republican candidate for Presidentship in the 2008 elections. September 11 apart, Giuliani has other things going for him. His term as mayor of New York is notable for ridding the city of crime.   His '9/11 campaign' seems to have ensured Rudy Giuliani's position at the top of opinion polls for the most likely Republican candidate for Presidentship in the 2008 elections. September 11 apart, Giuliani has other things going for him. His term as mayor of New York is notable for ridding the city of crime. His hardliner approach, involving strict crackdowns on offences major and minor, saw crime rates dropping. (Whether this owed entirely to his mayorship, is debated.) While he drew criticism for being politically incorrect and aiming at ethnic groups, his supporters say he did what was necessary to control the rampant crime rates that existed in New York.

Read the rest of this entry ... (177 words left)

Hillary Clinton may be the Democratic Party's leading candidate for President, but is she leaning too far out towards the conservative right? No doubt, she is a seasoned veteran in the political arena who believes in playing her cards with deliberation and care. But for some time now, she has been increasingly courting the right agenda.

Read the rest of this entry ... (179 words left)

Fred Thompson, the Republican candidate running in the 2008 elections, has been endorsed by the National Right to Life Committee. This may seem surprising to those who have been following Thompson's record on issues such as, abortion, the proposed human life amendment, or Terri Schiavo.

Read the rest of this entry ... (210 words left)