Hillary Clinton and the Presidential Race - Essay Example

Hillary Clinton and the Presidential Race Hillary Clinton and the Presidential Race Introduction While it can be said that this is a tight presidential race without a likely winner at the moment, the same should not be said for Clinton. That is because it is not her first time to vie for the American Presidency having already lost to Obama in the 2008 Democrats Primaries. Experienced and bearing other advantages that include being the only prominent female candidate, the former first lady seems to many like she would win. Analysts lay this acclaim to her policies and ability to steer strong campaigns. However, Hillary faces a stiff challenge in winning the Democratic Primaries as the competition that is offered by Bernie Sanders is very strong. Moreover, considering that this is just the first of two significant tasks as it only meets the stipulations that require parties to conduct primaries (Hershey, 2015), her challenges may be greater than already conceived. This paper is an analysis of the Hillary’s likely political fate as Democrat candidate during the primaries in the states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. The Choice on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina The Democratic Primaries, in accordance with the election precepts in the US, always start in start in the states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (Andrews, Bennet, & Parlapiano, 2015). The choice to analyze these three states is dependent on several factors. On the instance, they offer an early gauge on the strategies that are used by a political team (Lau & Pomper, 2004). Though there are the instances in which candidates have lost in these states and later recovered to win the primaries, most candidates do scheme to win here. That is because early wins bolsters plans and quivers opponents by creating the impression of a likely overall win. However, in the instances in which a candidate fails to win in these states, they always have the time to strategize and remodel their campaigns (Medvic, 2011). These two projections justify the choice on the three states as it is from whence that a campaign is dearly molded and catapulted for either a win or a loss (Coleman, Cantor, & Neale, 2001). Besides, New Hampshire and Iowa have largely been credited for their electoral independence. That implies that winning the electorate in these states a challenge to most of the candidates. According to Hart (2001), political strengths are majorly gauged by the manners in which candidates overcome challenges. Choosing these states was, therefore, also based on the objective of quantifying the Hillary’s ability to overcome political manacles. An Analysis of the Democratic Party in the Three States’ Electorates Though parties were opposed to the changes that required them to choose their candidates through election primaries (Hershey, 2015), they have since become reliant on the processes. That is because they help with the gauging on the popularity and capacity of an individual to win an election, a factor that is highly significant in the three first three states’ primaries. That explains why the states are of significance in the analysis of Hillary’s campaign track (Hershey, 2015). The first of the states, Iowa, has been, for a very long time, considered as a purple state. That implies that both the Republicans and Democrats have enjoyed equal success in the state though the Democratic Party has somewhat won a majority of the Iowa votes in the presidential elections since 1988. Despite this kind of success, the state has been nonetheless considered a swing state; a state that the presidential candidates from either party can use to benefit from to mold the success of their campaigns. This is indeed amongst the few states that have not been affected by polarization that has become a definitive tool that tells the differences between the Democrats and the Republicans (Dimock, Doherty, & Oates, 2014). Dawa (2015) whose articles in the New York Times have been focused on explaining the demographical data that compounds the Iowa electorate stated that Iowa is majorly composed of white liberals. According to him, this factor has been significant in the state’s labeling as a purple state. These projections are indications of the fact there is little likelihood of electorate dominion by the Democratic Party as the six Electoral College votes are more likely to be divided equally (Hart, 2001). The second state, New Hampshire, also has a history that exhibits electorate independence just like Iowa. That is, it is a purple state. Ideally, this state has a lot of similarities with Iowa as for some time (since 1992), Democrats have been winning most of the presidential polls. Of significance in this state is that fact that it is the most significant determinant of possible winners of elections. For instance, President Harry Truman felt compelled to drop from the presidential elections after failing to gunner convincing votes in New Hampshire. The electoral demographical data in the state indicates that New Hampshire will have four Electoral College votes up until 2020 after which a review may change this factor. Though this is an insignificant number compared to other states like Texas that has 28, the state can be used by the Democratic Party to strengthen their campaigns (Belenky, 2012). However, there is no guarantee that the party may emerge victorious in the state again. What can be banked upon by Democrats is the fact that Hillary has been a favorite at the state and even won in the 2008 primaries against Obama and besides, the party has had consecutive wins in four elections (Dimock, Doherty & Oates, 2014). The last of three states, South Carolina, has the most Electoral College votes (9) which is an indication to the magnitude of the role that it plays in the primaries. Besides, it always used as the tie breaker in the events of equal wins after the first two primaries. However, unlike the previous two states, South Carolina offers a stiffer challenge to the Democratic Party and its candidates as the electoral influences in the state have favored Republicans for the past seven elections. Ideally, South Carolina’s Popular Vote in the 2012 Election indicates that the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, gathered 55% as compared to Obama’s 44%. Nonetheless, the Democrat primaries offer an opportunity for the party’s candidates to make an impression that would improve their presidential election bids. Considering that the last Democratic Party’s win in the state was in 1976, the candidates’ options are only to limit the performances of the republicans and win as many of the Electoral College Votes as possible. Summary of Hillary’s Characteristics 1. Personal Characteristics Though Clinton has really tried to lead a private life, her prominence has not favored this factor hence her being personal traits being known to the public. Her personality is defined by her attitude and relations with peers and other citizens at large through which she has been described as dominant and controlling (Allen & Parnes, 2014). Such labeling is based on her unsentimental attitude, assertiveness, and strong will. These are factors that have enabled her to rise to challenges, for instance, the Lewinsky scandal that involved her family in 1998. Clinton is also intelligent, factor that is projected in her academic achievements. It is indeed her intelligence that has modeled her professional and political career. Other than that, the mother of one is considered as loyal and faithful. This is a factor that Levy and Krassas (2008) related to her failure to seek a divorce after the Lewinsky scandal that got her husband labeled as promiscuous and unfaithful. There is also the characteristic that has changed in Hillary over time. Described as a youth, Hillary was outgoing and sociable. However, this characteristic has changed over time as even in politics, there have been candidates that are considered as more outgoing than Hillary. Ideally, these personal characteristics have helped in molding Hillary’s ability to live a life that is mired with several steeples and to still serve her family as a wife and mother (Mapua, 2015). 2. Political Characteristics Hillary’s steady climb from the position of a senator to a presidential aspirant has been a testament to her ambitious personality and studious nature. She is also self-serving in that in these ambitions, she has not sought the favors that are accorded by other personalities. Her domineering character that is definitive of her personal traits also defines her political life as she always seeks to dominate most of the political aspects in which she participates. For instance, she did not take it kindly when Obama proved to be more persuasive and convincing, a factor that catapulted Obama to the helm (Blashfield, 2011). This attitude and domineering character is also spiced with sincerity as the lady is not one who would ever fail to express her opinions as lucidly as she thinks them. This is a factor that has, to a great dimension, influenced her political career as she always provokes ills that she considers as not favorable to the people. The other political trait that even cost the candidate her political prowess during the primary race against President Obama is her overconfidence. This nature of confidence has made it had for the lady to accept her political flaws and weaknesses. For instance, she resisted the idea of employing the services of a political psychiatrist in 2008. She also failed to acknowledge that she lacked better strategies as she eventually lost support of the Democratic Party’s supporters (Mapua, 2015). Ideally, the lady has both negative and positive traits. This nature of characterization implies that her candidacy cannot be superfluous and that there are the instances in which her opponents will have the upper hand. What she has, unlike a majority of them, is experience and the ability to turn around negative experiences into triumphs. Hillary’s abilities also make her one of the few candidates with the capacity to overcome polarizing politics. Such politics, as Dimock, Doherty and Oates (2014) explained, have become significant in the creation of a system in which individuals tend to identify with parties as opposed to evaluating the ideologies that are projected by politicians then voting on the basis of ability to perform. 3. Hillary’s Campaign-Related Traits During her numerous campaigns, Hillary has projected a knack and ability to win elections. Despite the fact that she lost the presidential primaries against Obama (Andrews, Bennet & Parlapiano, 2015), Hillary proved that she is a good opportunist (Blashfield, 2011). For instance, she has often taken advantage of the gender debates to vie. Being a female aspirant, her position always appeals to several people. Other than that, Hillary has proven that she is determined. This is projected in the fact that despite campaigns that do not turn up to be productive all the time, she never gives up. Willey (2007) described her as focused, and that a loss at one time during a primary can only fire her up to strive to win other elections. The most significant of the traits is her being a strategist. This is a testament to the projections that were made by Bailey (2009) who explained that only strategists can survive for long in politics. Most of Hillary’s campaigns always start with a dwindle. However, her pragmatic strategies have always served in improving her performances in elections. That is why, despite her current dwindle in opinion polls, several analysts still believe that she is the likeliest of all candidates to win the presidential election. Hillary’s magnificent campaign traits are bolstered by her personal and political traits which are factors that serve her in channeling her abilities to counter the challenges that are encountered during campaigns (Bailey, 2009). A Prediction of Hillary’s Performances in the Three States Despite the fact election primaries have been postponed in several of the states with an exception of four (Andrews, Bennet, & Parlapiano, 2015), the campaigns have already kick started with intensified debates being held. Such nature of postponing, as Dimock, Doherty, and Oates (2014) explained, can be capitalized upon by politicians as influential as Hillary to neutralize her competitors’ performances. Ideally, Hillary may poses significant threat to the other Democratic candidates as she is experienced and understands what it takes to win the primaries in the three states. However, political subjects are dynamic and the factors upon which she dwelled during her first involvement in the primary nominations are different from the factors that are considered as significant in this current election (Mapua, 2015). That implies that to an extent, the only advantage she has is her ability to understand the political psychologies of the voters in these areas. Nonetheless, this is an advantage that would serve in influencing the voting thus helping her win the elections in these states. However, the most recent opinion research that was conducted in the month of September proves otherwise. Bernie Sanders, at the moment stands as the most favorite candidate to win the primaries in Iowa. That is because a large population of the liberal whites, who make up over sixty percent of the voters in the state, favor his policies and personality (Burlingame, 2008). However, Clinton’s fame in New Hampshire has not waned since she last won there in 2008 (Andrews, Bennet, & Parlapiano, 2015). That implies that a loss at Iowa will be followed with a win in New Hampshire. To this point, there will be a tie between Sanders and Clinton who are the main Democratic Party’s candidates. This is a factor that will sire a rush and competition for the third subsequent state, South Carolina; the tiebreaker. It is at this point that Hillary’s experience is expected to take course as she understands the precepts that are involved in breaking the tie (Burlingame, 2008). That implies that she is better positioned, compared to her closes party rival, to come out with a win at South Carolina. Ideally, the candidate is more likely to win in two of the three analyzed states. This is a factor that may bolster her campaigns to emerge as the nominated candidate for the Democratic Party. Then after, she will face even a more competitive battle against the Republican candidate. This may be a tough race with several steeples and conspiracies for Hillary as Dawa (2015) opined in his columns. Nonetheless, she has a very great chance of living the dream she has always had; becoming America’s first female president. Considering her potential, the politician may indeed become the next American President. Conclusion Hillary Clinton’s presidential race is buoyed by her experience and understanding of the political terrain in the US. Besides, she has numerous attributes that not only define her capacity to handle the enigmas that characterize such high profile campaigns with efficacy, but also position her as a favorite amongst many voters. Hillary’s traits are diversified which is a factor that explains her endurance to different subject matters (Mapua, 2015). Ideally, she has a knack to strategize and win elections through campaigns that are objectively set on dominating the political terrain. However, it cannot be deduced that the opposition that is offered by other candidates is unlikely to hamper her campaigns. That is because, despite her experiences, the factors that were addressed during her previous political involvements have changed. This is a factor that explains that Hillary’s political endeavors will be more challenging this time round. However, Hillary, along with other Democratic Party’s candidates, are unlikely to have an easy ride in the three states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, the states in which the primaries will kick start. That is because the two states of Iowa and New Hampshire are purple states that have equal victory opportunities for candidates from the two parties of Republicans and Democrats. Other than that, South Carolina is a red state; a state in which Republicans have been domineering with subsequent wins over the years. Considering that these three states are significant in determining the general poll results or even the campaign course that candidates exploit, these challenges are indications that the Democratic Party may lose the presidential election to the Republican Party (Mapua, 2015). References Allen, J., & Parnes, A. (2014). HRC: State secrets and the rebirth of Hillary Clinton. Andrews, W., Bennet, K., & Parlapiano, A. (2015). 2016 Primary Calendar and Results. The New Times. Bailey, N. (2009). Hillary Clinton: 1. Vancouver, Wash.: Bluewater Comics. Belenky, A. S. (2012). Understanding the fundamentals of the U.S. presidential election system. Heidelberg: Springer. Blashfield, J. F. (2011). Hillary Clinton. New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark. Burlingame, J. (2008). Hillary Clinton: A life in politics. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers. Coleman, K. J., Cantor, J. E., & Neale, T. H. (2001). Presidential elections in the United States: A primer. Huntington, NY: Novinka Books. Dawa, M. (2015). Will Hillary Clinton Be Pilloried by the Benghazi Committee? The New York Times. New York. Dimock, M., Doherty, C., & Oates. (2014). Political Polarization in the American Public. Pew Research Center. Hart, R. P. (2001). Communication in U.S. elections: New agendas. Lanham, Md. [u.a.: Rowman & Littlefield. Hershey, M.R. (2015). Party Politics in America: How Parties Choose Candidates (Chapter 9). Pearson, Boston. Lau, R. R., & Pomper, G. M. (2004). Negative campaigning: An analysis of U.S. Senate elections. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield. Levy, D. B., & Krassas, N. R. (2008). Hillary Clinton: A biography. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. Mapua, J. (2015). Hillary Clinton. Medvic, S. K. (2011). Political consultants in U.S. congressional elections. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State Univ. Press. Willey, K. (2007). Target: Caught in the crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Los Angeles: World Ahead Publishing. Read More