Factors in Choosing the President

The new President that we, as a collective people in America, will be choosing this November, is going to have to make many crucial decisions regarding our lives and the place of our country within the world. Many problems will crop up that demand an appropriate mixture of judgment, action, restraint, and balance. Where the President stands philosophically will determine his or her actions to a large extent. And there are two broad areas in which I see the potential Presidents differing.

One area is where to achieve a balance between the public good and private interests. Issues such as undocumented immigration, energy conservation and independence, and problems with our health care and insurance system are examples that a future President will need to come down on one side of the public/private dichotomy or the other. The other area is how a President should react to events in the world that either directly bear on American security and economic interests, or indirectly affect us through disasters, wars, or human rights issues arising elsewhere. What is the appropriate balance between projecting a forceful, imposing image of U.S. military might and projecting the image of America as the world's hope for benevolent, peaceful change through diplomacy and trade? If a foreign government behaves in a provocative manner against the United States, how will the new President react?

Part of what will determine the new President's decisions will be based on the aforementioned philosophical points. And it's not just a conservative vs. liberal question. On illegal immigration and foreign policy, conservatives favor a big government approach, while liberals favor more state intervention in issues like health care, energy, and the environment. But, of course, the candidates' philosophical take on the issues is not the only factor in affecting the next President's decisions. It will also be the quality and demeanor of that individual's personality, as well as that of his or her advisers. And the ability to clearly convey his or her vision of where the nation needs to go to the American people is also crucial.

So there you have it: the skeleton of how one should evaluate prospective Presidents. Not by whose aide said what about a rival candidate. Not by how much money a candidate raised. Not by whether the candidate has been winning "red","blue", large, or small states in the primaries and caucuses. Not by the gender, age, perceived race, religion, or political pedigree of the candidate. Not by what the candidate's spouse said. Not by the candidate's middle or married name. And not by whether one candidate seems to be more likely to win. The office of President is too powerful and the stakes are too high to vote for irrelevant reasons. But vote we shall, for better or for worse!