Opinion

Death of the idealist: New approach to 2016 elections

idealist

Kirin Daniels/The Cougar

President Barack Obama killed the political idealist. I expect that the campaigning for the 2016 presidential election will be lackluster in the public’s eye compared to 2008 campaigning because American voters have witnessed the dwindling of an uplifting campaign from Obama’s administration.

Obama relied heavily on hope and change as part of his political message and, understandably, could not deliver the change he promised. For radical change to happen, it requires a lot of time and patience.

If anything, the Obama administration has laid out the ground work and foundation for change to happen. The purpose of government is to primarily maintain what already works, such as the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Reserve and the Constitutional Budget Office.

As New York Times opinion columnist David Brooks pointed out, “the politics of the last few years have left people disappointed, disillusioned and cynical.”

People had high hopes, aspirations and expectations when Obama took office in 2008. While Obama has done many great things in both of his terms, it’s not enough to satisfy what the nation expected. At the next election, American voters will be looking for a resilient world leader. Americans won’t be looking for the seemingly perfect political candidate that can be expected to do no wrong.

No longer are we looking for a savior. We want a realist who understands that government consists of core functions that counteract negative actions.

The government is in place to “put out fires,” keep criminals off the streets, settle disputes and prevent already bad situations from getting worse. Public relations senior Christina Nemry said she looks for an articulate candidate with good rhetoric and who can deliver their message effectively.

“I want a candidate that has been in the political world with notoriety. I’m looking towards someone like Hillary Clinton,” Nemry said. “She’s gone through scandals, she’s risen out of them and she’s well-known enough in the public eye. To me, Clinton will be a strong candidate in the running because she won’t over promise what she’s capable of doing.”

People also vote for the candidate that promises the biggest impact. Over time, when the winning candidate fails to deliver the promised results, people become disappointed and it becomes a cycle of highs and lows.

While Obama failed to delivered the promise for large-scale change, the current administration has seen a massive improvement following the Bush administration.

The Huffington Post outlined several reasons on why “Obama is one of the best presidents ever” and listed several reasons such as his advocacy for equal rights, peace, environment and education.

In addition, Washington Monthly listed the top 50 accomplishments of the Obama administration. Most of these accomplishments fall under the economy and the end of the war in Iraq.

Then there are some people, such as business administration junior Caroline Alvarez, who do not agree with the accomplishments the media has praised.

“I haven’t seen much change, except him making matters worse,” Alvarez said. “Obamacare is a good idea, but in the fine print it does more damage than what current healthcare provides. Most people are paying more on their premiums than they would be for their regular healthcare insurance provider.”

I believe most people will be concerned for economic growth, foreign policy and affairs in the coming election. Voters are going to look towards a leader with extensive experience in politics, beyond anyone else in recent years. I expect the candidates will continue the work and progress made by the Obama administration.

Like many political issues, healthcare and education reform will take many years before coming into effect, which is something that voters fail to understand. When the nation demands that these types of changes happen, they’re often met with disappointment.

“Obama talks a big game but doesn’t follow through,” Alvarez said. “He made all these promises during his election, but people don’t see any of the results.”

This disappointment has impacted many Americans who will come into the next election with a more cynical belief towards politics, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with this view.

America’s voters need to be more realistic about current affairs and the approach to solutions. The political idealist will have to lower their ideals when they vote in 2016.

Opinion columnist Gemrick Curtom is a public relations senior and may be reached at [email protected].

3 Comments

  • The problem though, is that I don’t want a experienced politician. Experienced politicians are experienced in being a certain personality, ability to twist words, and overall gets things on his/her red or blue agenda done only by using favors and contacts. This shouldn’t be the ideal in a presidential candidate.

    I’d prefer an idealist president who achieves some of what is promised, while also always knowing there is more to do…

    Rather than a person who was once an idealist (why else would you go into politics, other than a control freak… Which I also wouldn’t want as a president) and then worn down and swallowed by our political system, thus giving in and not giving it that good ole American fight.

    Final comment: America was built by idealists, they obviously had a different want for America than where it is.

  • Also, as a journalist, is it really what you want to quote a bunch of other journalists articles? Of course if you were quoting data or something that you couldn’t come up with yourself, that’s great, but seems a bit unprofessional otherwise.

  • Americans have to become active participants in the political and governmental process. We have to stop accepting (and developing half-witted “truths” for ourselves) the sound-bytes of politicians and trusting that they have our best interest at heart. Politicians will respond to whomever or whatever will get them elected. That has become the end rather than the means. Whoever controls this, controls the politician – ultimately the decision making mouthpiece. If Americans want their best interests attended to, we must engage. It is not easy, but it is easier that it was for those who first pursued it; it is hard, but it is not harder than it was for those who first pursued it. This is perhaps the most critical thing we should attend to at the most crucial time in our history. If we do not understand this and treat it with more diligence and urgency than we anticipate the next episode of “The Walking Dead” or
    “The Voice” then we will become one and lose the other.

Leave a Comment