Comparison of Two Presidential Candidates - Coursework Example

New York vs. New York for President If present national poll indicators hold true, the U.S. Senator from New York, Hillary Clinton, and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani will win their respective Party’s nomination and be matched against each other in the upcoming Presidential election. Many have suggested that Clinton is ideologically to the right of her Democratic base and Giuliani to the left of most Republicans. Therefore, both are positioned somewhere in middle which is apparent when examining their stance on some of the more high-profile issues such as gay rights and energy policies but are on opposing sides of arguably the most divisive issue, the Iraq War. This discussion will examine the differences and similarities as well as the varying nuances within the two candidate’s positions as they vie for the highest office in the land. Iraq Clinton has often been mischaracterized as voting to authorize the Iraq invasion, particularly by Giuliani. Her vote was to allow the President to take military actions as a last resort if all other avenues such as sanctions and diplomacy, as outlined by the United Nations, failed. She claims she voted for this authorization because she didn’t believe Congress should act to tie the President’s hands if force was necessary. As she and all others know now, President Bush decided to circumvent UN directives and in contradiction to world as well as the International Court of Justice opinion began the invasion in 2003. Clinton has stated that if she had been President at that time, she would not have sent the military into the sovereign nation of Iraq nor requested the authority to do so. She was opposed to the ‘Surge’ and believes the U.S. should immediately begin a strategic withdrawal, or ‘phased redeployment’ of the troops. “Trying to withdraw is not something you snap your fingers and tell people, do it tomorrow. It has to be done in a thoughtful, orderly, careful way that defends our troops on these routes they’re going to have to take to get men and equipment out of Iraq” (“Candidates on Iraq” 2007). Giuliani was in favor of the recent troop increase labeled the ‘Surge’ and is, in essence, in agreement with Bush’s assessment that ‘they’ will follow us home following a withdrawal. He ties the Iraq War in with the ‘war on terror’ which is the main theme of his candidacy. Many have criticized Giuliani for tying in many issues in with terror and 9/11. He does not favor a timetable for withdrawal arguing that never in history has an army told the enemy when they were retreating and believes the U.S. should retain its current troop level in Iraq so to eventually stabilize the region, an imperative venture in his estimation. “What we have to do, and we haven’t done right according to Giuliani, is take on that responsibility of nation-building. We created that responsibility for ourselves when we overthrew Saddam Hussein, which we did very effectively. Any withdrawal from Iraq would only encourage future terror attacks” ( “Candidates on Iraq” 2007). Evidently Giuliani disagrees with the 2000 Presidential candidate Bush, as does Bush when he said the U.S. should not be engaged in nation building. Energy Policy The two candidates agree that the U.S. should reduce its dependence on foreign oil by encouraging the use of alternative fuels but their principal motivation is dissimilar. Clinton emphasizes the global warming crisis while Giuliani, predictably, invokes national security as the principle rationale. Clinton also points to the rising cost of gasoline being a particular burden to poor families and damaging the economy as a whole. In addition, investing in alternative fuels would create new technologies and jobs but her main concern is protecting the environment. “Our values demand that we be good stewards of the planet for our children and our children’s children. We are failing that simple moral test if we continue to stand by as the Earth warms faster than at any time in the past 200,000 years” (“Candidates on Iraq” 2007). Among Clinton’s intentions if elected President is to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil by at least half of current levels by 2025, require stricter gas mileage standards on cars made or sold in the U.S. and for half of the nation’s gas pumps to dispense ethanol by 2015 and all by 2025. As an incentive, Clinton would give a 50 percent tax break to private station owners that installed ethanol pumps but require major oil companies to install the pumps. She wants to allocate $1 billion for cellulosic ethanol research, double the tax credits for hybrid vehicles and require federal vehicles to be the most fuel efficient  available. She would provide tax incentives for efficient homes and promote nuclear, wind and solar power to replace coal-burning electric power plants (“Hilary Clinton’s Energy Policy” 2007). Giuliani wants the U.S. to have an aggressive energy policy which he says the country has been severely lacking. He would set goals for the construction of nuclear power plants, encourage hybrid car and ethanol use. Weaning the nation from foreign oil is good for the planet and decreases monies sent to nations that fund terrorism. “This is not just good for the reduction of global warming, pollution, the domestic economy and national security, it is absolutely necessary in defeating the terrorists. Ending America’s dependence on energy from abroad would be a major factor in our being able to defuse dramatically the reach and the power of Islamic terrorism” (Gerstein, 2007). Giuliani, like Clinton, also supports increasing the use of solar, wind, clean-coal technology and hydroelectric power. Though he vows to cut government spending, Giuliani demonstrates his resolve to enhance the use of alternative energy by promising to implement extensive subsidies to encourage the use of alternative energy. Gay Rights With either candidate, the homosexual agenda wins. Clinton and Giuliani have long been staunch supporters of gay rights including the marital benefits for gay partners. The divergence between their opinions concerns gays in the military. Clinton admits that the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy instituted during her husband’s administration has largely been a failure and supports lifting the ban entirely which Canada, the UK, Australia and other U.S. allies have done without causing the problems espoused by opponents of the measure. According to Clinton, quoting Republican icon Barry Goldwater, “Gay soldiers need to shoot straight, not be straight” (“Candidates” 2007). Giuliani is not in favor of changing policies in the middle of a war and likely would not be in favor of it after the war. He consistently has said that the President should defer to the opinion of military leaders on this and other matters concerning the armed forces such as, for example, the troop surge. “I think we should rely on the judgment of our commanders in a situation like this. They know what’s disruptive and what’s not” (“Candidates” 2007). Conclusion Those to the far ideological left or right cannot fully support either candidate. Both sides are so frightened by the prospect of the opposing candidate they will likely vote for the one affiliated with their particular Party of choice. The differences on the domestic front are superficial at best but widely diverge on the Iraq issue. To illustrate the similarities between the two, both have been known to wear dresses on occasion and are tough, battle hardened New York politicians. Either way, most Americans agree that whoever is elected the next President will be a great improvement over the current occupier of the White House. Works Cited “The Presidential Candidates on Iraq.” New York Times (2007). November 25, 2007 “Hilary Clinton’s Energy Policy.” ZFacts.com. (2007). November 25, 2007 Gerstein, Josh. “Giuliani Says His Energy Plan Would Aid Planet, Fight Terror.” The New York Sun. (July 24, 2007). November 25, 2007 “Candidates.” OnTheIssues.org. (2007). November 25, 2007 Read More