My personal belief is that the energy issue incorporates all of the other issues into itself. For example, the War on Terror is fought in the Middle East, where the majority of our imported oil comes from. This leads to economic peril in the United States as we have seen over the past few years, which ultimately causes global economic stress, as the United States is a leading trade partner for numerous foreign countries. All factors considered, our domestic economic policy is ultimately controlled by countries such as Saudi Arabia, so if the Republicans plan on winning the general election in November of 2008, they have a lot to overcome. With current average gasoline prices across the United States sitting at just under $4.00 per gallon, up nearly $1.00 since 2007, some national energy policy must be enacted, whether that includes drilling in Alaska, or seeking alternative forms of power, including cutting-edge solar and nuclear power. Americans simply have a need for energy – petroleum, natural gas, electricity – it’s how America seems to function in the new technological age.
Obviously, a new national policy must be developed before prices continue to skyrocket. The source of our new energy should be derived from nuclear power. We are a country with top performing scientists that are well-equipped for research. The technology is already out there, it is a matter of making this technology affordable for the average citizen. The next president, republican or democrat, must jumpstart a nuclear program in all states with at least some allocated federal funds. We cannot simply pull out of the War to maintain this money, however, because the War on Terrorism is very much like Vietnam, with the exception that people actually care for the troops. America is stuck in a war of which it must gradually fade out. Instead, investment and exploration funded through taxes should be strongly encouraged again by the federal and state governments to boost the economy, and allow liquid cash-flow to fund the researching. The fact remains that nuclear energy has proven to be environmentally friendly. Of course, nuclear power plants don’t simply appear, and it will take a lot of time, money, and resources to convert to a nuclear-based energy system. However, the reduced consumption of oil will allow us to import less and become economically and therefore, politically independent. The ultimate goal is having the market become stabilized, and eventually, moving away from oil completely.
So who will do the best at holding our country together? I think John McCain will be the 44th President of the United States. Contrary to popular belief, the United States is not in a recession yet, which is defined as two consecutive quarters of declining GDP – in effect, six months. The race thus far has appeared to be the democrats’ race to lose. However, the Democratic Party has been torn apart by the prolonged Obama/Clinton race in the primaries. John McCain has appeared as a “solutionist” according to Mr. Lewis Oliver, since the extremely polarized parties on either end will hate him, but he picks up a majority of the moderate vote. Also, Hillary supporters will not want to vote for Obama in the general election. Obama is campaigning with a series of slogans that television has bought into, not necessarily how you lead the country. Although John McCain is in danger of being a one-term president, he has suggested the priorities of his Presidency to include controversial items such as social security, immigration, and a national energy policy – which can almost guarantee he would not get reelected in 2012. As crazy as it may sound, I think McCain should choose Hillary Clinton as his running mate to pull through and win the race in November. The country wants change, and John McCain being a moderate, would be willing to work with our democratic Congress, while Hillary would represent commonality. Hillary Clinton already has experience in the White House, and America isn’t used to not having an incumbent running for office. Obama will definitely pick up the youth vote, but I believe there is still a silent majority that will appear in November coming in strong for McCain. No doubt, heated debate on hot-button issues is unavoidable, but our government needs to represent all sides, not to quietly go about their business without regards to the general public. Also, with a McCain/Clinton ticket, the country wouldn’t rush out of the war, causing even more global economic stress, but instead we could start a new calendar, setting a new agenda for an administration to work its hardest to get our troops out of Iraq, as quickly and safely as possible. John McCain stated in a press conference last month that he has a plan to get the troops out safely by 2013. With an increasing number of independents, candidates can’t just strike for party loyalty and exploit their base party for votes, so a Hillary Clinton running mate would definitely attract a lot of the democratic votes. The only problem may be getting extreme party loyalists to vote, but in the end it’s either John McCain or Barack Obama. As for the age issue, you can’t fix your birth certificate; therefore, McCain shouldn’t be stereotyped on his age just as Obama is not stereotyped by his race.
The 2008 election is going to be a politically exciting one. One of the largest youth turnouts is expected in the 2008 election, indicating a higher interest level among college students. Obama may be relying on this appeal for some of his votes, but regardless, he will be a tough candidate to defeat. Nonetheless, I think a lot of government-public interaction is going to have to occur for a President to have high approval ratings. On January 20, 2009, when McCain, Obama, or even Clinton accepts their Presidency, and offers their bold solutions to current domestic issues, they must be relentless with their decisions and choose the right cabinet to represent America properly. With the “dawning of a new administration, [and] the nation fac[ing] perils within and without,” the 44th President of the United States must definitely have a national energy policy and focus on funding important issues through fiscal policy.
