Opinion

Simplifying the Campaign Message

With the election just hours away, I find myself in a familiar place. For years, I’ve been guilty of looking back at all of the speeches, debates, commercials, and analyzing all of the things that my candidate should have said that would have made him or her a shoe-in for office, at least in my mind. With that said, I do feel like there are some key points that candidates on both sides of the aisle miss out on that could seriously propel them in a positive direction, especially when talking about the presidential election. As a conservative, some of the key points I look for in a candidate are obvious, but I’ll lay them out in order to make my point. The last several years, for me, the issues that take center stage are; the 2nd Amendment, the preservation of marriage between a man and a woman, finding a candidate who is pro-life, and an obvious talking point about every election is taxation. Since I’ve been following politics closely, for 20 years, give or take, I’ve noticed a shift, or a progression, if you will, of what issues shape the presidential race. Some years back, especially in the Clinton v Bush showdown, taxation was a big platform for both men. Though I was young and just a novice in all things political, I found myself thinking, “Only Congress has the power to levy taxes. Why are these guys making that a focal point of their campaign?” Since then, presidential taxation, if you will, has become the new norm, and in my view, a sort of “unofficial, silent amendment” that has been quietly slipped in. We are so used to it by now, it’s the norm for many of us. Now, back to what I was driving at when I began with the key points. I believe that the next president could make serious waves by taking the following stance on these issues; when asked how a candidate feels about the Second Amendment, marriage between a man and a woman, and pro-life measures, the candidate should respond, “I am running for president, and I believe these are matters that should be determined by each state, not by the federal government. Therefore, while I have my own personal convictions, I do not feel that this office should intervene in the affairs of the states.” And there you have it. In my opinion, this would be much more unifying than the direction we are going now. Not to mention, that’s how our nation was set up to begin with! In regard to taxation, again, this is my opinion, the ideal candidate would respond, “Taxation is up to the Congress, not the president, therefore I do not believe that the office of the president should take on the role of levying taxes.” Simple.
In my view, this election would have been perfect for the GOP to run on a message that simple. Trump, Cruz, Carson, or anyone else that would have been nominated, could have easily defeated Hillary Clinton running on a message so simple. In fact, with her divisiveness and corruption, her cold personality, and all the other negatives, I believe the GOP could have taken millions of votes from her by simplifying and unifying. Instead, they allow themselves to get drawn into the trap, arguing over who is going to impose higher taxes, who will lower them, they bicker back and forth about gun control, and what steps they’ll take for or against abortion issues. Step out of it, leave it to the states. At that point, we know for real that you aren’t just talking about less government. Give us a message with some guts, leave the issues up to the states, and let the office of the President handle our foreign affairs and national security. I hope for the sake of our nation we are not left with another Clinton presidency, but moreover, I hope our future leaders, Republican, Democrat, or Independent, will take America into consideration, not just the party they’re running for.

Loading...
Loading...
To Top