Change, experience, and the Democratic Primary
Change, experience, and the Democratic Primary
All the presidential candidates are talking about ‘change’ in Washington DC. But what kind of change are either Republicans or Democrats able and willing to bring to the post-Bush White House?
Over the past two months the race for the United States presidency has taken several dramatic turns with a new frontrunner emerging almost weekly. Anyone looking back ive or six months ago would not guess that the race for the White House would be where it is today. On the Republican side former front runner Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney dropped out of the race leaving Senator John McCain as the presumptive nominee. On the Democratic side, it is down to a two person race between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Few would have thought that a newcomer to the national stage like Senator Obama would have been able to challenge the Clinton political machine for the Democratic nomination. With record turnouts at the polls this year, the struggle between the desire for change and the need for experience is fueling a tight race in a historical run for the White House.
The Democratic Party has seen the largest primary turnout in history this year, with the majority of the electorate wanting change in a struggle to part ways with the past eight years of the Bush Administration. The race remains in a dead heat between Clinton and Obama with no near end in sight. Although it appears Obama is pulling ahead, anything can change. However, the interesting dynamic that emerged is the battle between experience and change, with Hillary Clinton labeling herself as the candidate of experience who can work within Washington’s existing system, and Barack Obama representing the face of America who wants to change the status quo in Washington.
The feeling that the electorate really wants change was most evident after the Iowa caucuses, where Senator Obama won convincingly over his opponents with his mantra of change. The next day, not only were all of the major Democratic candidates talking about change and the idea of bringing in new voters to the political process, but the Republican candidates also changed the tone of their campaigns and began to discuss change as well. With all of this talk about “change,” what exactly do these candidates mean by it?
Senator Obama says that the change he wants to bring about requires a person who is not tied down by the special interests that currently dominate the political sphere in Washington. He believes that his experiences outside of Washington makes him the best agent of change not only with the way the US handles its own internal affairs but also in changing the way the US interacts with the world and the way the world sees the US. The Senator also envisions himself as a candidate who can transcend partisan politics to get things done in an era of polarizing partisanship. Obama’s ability to bring new young voters to the process and attract independent voters has played a large role in his success.
Senator Clinton on the other hand claims that she is the best agent of change in the race. In her opinion, without Washington experience nobody can bring about the change America desires and needs. She points to Senator Obama’s brief time in the United States senate to show that she is better qualiied to be President and change the trajectory of the United States. Clinton says that her experience enables her to be ready on day one when she becomes President.
While both of these candidates offer very similar solutions to the problems plaguing America, the electorate is grappling with the tough decision of deciding which of these candidates is better equipped to carry out the agenda of the Democratic Party. This year with American troops bogged down in Iraq and the US economy slowing down, the voters are far more informed and energized for this election. They not only want a change in economic policy, but also want an end to the war in Iraq and an end to the Bush Administrations go it alone strategy in foreign policy. All of this has translated into a tight race for the Democratic Party nomination. Polling consistently shows that most Americans feel the country is headed in the wrong direction and that people do in fact want a major shake up in Washington. For the Democrats, voters are increasingly worried about the economy but are also focused on the war in Iraq and healthcare. In the February 5th primary, when more than twenty states voted, exit polling showed that two-thirds of the voters who said that a Democratic candidate could bring about change in Washington voted for Barack Obama. However, Hillary Clinton continues to poll higher than Obama among voters who want the candidate with the most experience.
This race for the Democratic nomination will likely be settled in the coming months, but many questions loom on the horizon. How will this tight race ultimately be decided? Will voters inevitably break towards one candidate or will party insiders have the inal say in the outcome? It will also be interesting to see if this desire for change lasts or whether it is a temporary fascination with the candidacy of Senator Obama. The implications for the general election are also very important. If the Democrats wait too long to choose their nominee, the Republicans will have an edge in being able to rally behind one candidate for a longer period of time before the general election. Whatever the outcome, it is refreshing to see voters excited about an election for the irst time in many years, where the United States could have its irst female or African American president.
Post new comment