Election thus Far: Necessary Goals and Objectives

Its election time again, and to no surprise the dialogue hasn’t changed.  One party represents “America” and the other one surprising represents “America” as well.  The time spent identifying and defining what it means to be American is moderately insulting and a waste of everyone’s time.  In our current economic and social climate, I am more concerned with plans to fix the issues than I am with the question, what makes us American.  More frustrating than the defining of the country is the exploitation of American nationalism to gain interest in one party over another. 

If there is one thing we’ve learned in the past four years, it’s that the partisanship in Washington stifles progress.  Party platforms are marketed and the commitment to not compromising is made to be a sign of leadership.  I believe it’s a sign of weakness, and an epic failure in leadership.  The Romney campaign, amidst their ambiguity in policy plans, will most likely rely on a combination of pro-economic partisan domestic and foreign policy with a prevalent tea party influence.  If the Republicans want to improve the country and restore faith in the system they simply cannot rely on their traditional dogma. 

My biggest critique of the Republican Party is that their ideas rely on an illusion of control.  Their reliance on the private sector to deliver favorable results to the nation AS A WHOLE is outdated and not necessarily effective.  At the end of the day, small businesses and/or large international corporations do not have the same focus and goals as the government.  They will provide value to the economy, they will create jobs, but their responsibility to the people is limited to their direct stakeholders.  In fact, businesses would be acting recklessly if they took on costly social agendas to appease people not associated with the business.  So by Republicans looking for private sector solutions for the progression of wealth for the nation, for healthcare, and for social programs is irresponsible and shortsighted.

Republicans have fallen into a trap of wanting to implement simplicity over complexity.  Oversimplifying the role of government can be a dangerous thing.  The issue with a simple idea of government is that it’s very difficult to apply in a complex and developed nation.  There are so many different types of peoples, so many different economic classes, and so many inefficiencies that a simple form of government will neglect too many people.  This is why I don’t believe in what the Tea Party stands for.  The nation is beyond a point in which we can apply the most basic form of government and actually see the nation benefit from it.  I don’t think any of us really understand how far the reach of government really goes.  A complete destruction of the house, and the minimalist execution of a more fundamental government would be detrimental to everyone.

To contrast the republicans, the democrats face the same issues but in a different context.  They also face the same illusion of control, but it’s within their reliance on the public sector.  As stated above, government is necessary, but there is inefficiency in government just as much if not more than the private sector.  In some ways this is worse, because tax revenues are used to fund government projects.  So if a government program is ineffective and costly, you are just eroding and destroying the value of the tax revenues that the nation worked hard to earn. 

President Obama has over reached, over spent, and over promised to the American people.  I don’t believe he had a choice though.  He faced a decision.  Let the market correct itself with the risk of a global depression, or step in and spend wildly to secure a long recession.  If there is one thing that Republicans should understand, it’s that John McCain would have faced the same issues and would have come to the same conclusion.  20 years of bad Housing policy, poor oversight, and over indulgence can’t be fixed in four years.  He put out the fire, but you can’t rebuild a country in four years.  Truthfully, you won’t rebuild the country in the next four years either.

Solutions can be made, and Washington can function properly to improve the country.  Republican or Democrat there should be one ideology to focus on, and that’s fiscal responsibility.  We need to be more grounded with our spending, and understand the great vulnerability we carry because of our debt. 

If our nation had a budget surplus right now I would without a doubt vote for President Obama.  We are 16 trillion dollars in debt right now, and I just don’t know if I trust President Obama’s ideology to fix the issue.  Mitt Romney isn’t the smoothest statesmen, in fact he is kind of awkward and repetitive at times, but you have to look at his record.  He was able to successfully implement the skills he learned in the private sector to a government budget.  When he became the Governor of Massachusetts he inherited a sizeable deficit and a state that was struggling as a whole.  After 1 year he created a surplus in the state’s budget.  Once he got the fiscal house in order, he rewarded his constituents with a state funded Healthcare program.  He has been criticized for this in the media and compared to President Obama because of his views on Healthcare.  Mitt Romney will win the election if he can make Romneycare his biggest accomplishment and not his biggest weakness.  He implemented fiscal responsibility to secure the funds for this program.  He rewarded his constituents with something that they needed, and something they couldn’t afford.  Mitt Romney needs to communicate this to the American people and without Tea Party influence show them that he and Paul Ryan have the budgetary expertise to make their lives better in the near future.  One step before the other, and the first step is fixing the nations fiscal house.

I believe that this election will be one of the few in which the candidates don’t need to focus on the nitty gritty of policy and the details of their economic/social plans.  They don’t need to focus on which tax loop holes will be closed or which tax haven will be eliminated.  The ambiguity and demagoguery of these plans alone will only add to the distrust of our political system.  What needs to happen is the explaining and defining of a vision.  A vision of where they want to take this country.  Throw out the traditional campaign tactics and focus on optimism not pessimism.  Don’t repeat President Obama’s record, because truth be told the 8.2% unemployed and 17.1% underemployed are well aware of their current situation.  The 25% of US children in poverty are aware of their parent’s situations. 

Communicating that there is a way out is essential.  Don’t argue with the opposition.  Tell them, if you give me four years I’ll give you solvent social programs.  If you give me four years, we will bring back the middle class.  And more importantly if you give me four years, I’ll give you a renewed faith and sense of pride in our Political Process. 

The Bipartisan challenges that either candidate will be faced in the next four years will define their place in history.  Either candidate must rise to those challenges.  It’s in moments of turmoil, in which we discover who we are.  In these moments, we either rise up or we fail.  I believe our country is in a moment of turmoil, and we need selfless leadership to help the advancement of the country.  This type of leadership is what makes you American, and coming together to solve a common goal is what it means to be American.

Let’s hope both candidates understand this.