The Coin Is A Man With No Political Experience Whatsoever

When George Washington was elected President in 1789 by members of the fledgling United States of America, he was setting into motion a tradition that has stood the test of over 225 years - the presidential election. Even as the United States has seen dozens of wars, made hundreds of scientific advances, and selected thousands of politicians to seats everywhere from small town councils to Congress, the principles of the election have remained the same; the people band together to determine who will best protect their interests at home and assure that the US will always remain on top in foreign policy. Oftentimes, this is found to be a difficult decision, as public opinion is constantly wavering. One sees this in action particularly during the 1992 election - a battle of wills between Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ross Perot; complete with lead changes, major vote swings, and Perot’s unprecedented initial success - ultimately a false alarm to the bipartisan establishment.

My research about why Hilary Clinton lost the presidency seemed to lead me to all the answers. She was unprepared. Despite that I see the data and the numbers, I still believe she should have won. She had the majority vote. It was minor mistakes that she made, but I assume that the price she must pay. I am a firm believe that if it is meant for you, then it will be yours and no one can take it away from you. Unfortunately, it was not meant for her. She lost because she assumed that prior voting behavior would swing in her favor, she assumed that just because she was the well know experienced candidate that that would lead her to win, and she assumed that it was all secure. She expected it to be handed to her because she did deserve it because

How did her male colleagues react? One incredulous congressman told her, “I was told there was a lady here in trousers, so I had to come over and see for myself.” Of the dozen or more men who spoke to Mrs. Reid about her outfit, none had other than compliments, she said. (There were no other congresswomen on the floor to comment.) (Ross, “Rep. Reid in a Pantsuit”)

This year the presidential elections will take place at the beginning of November, and there are lots of people wondering how this is going to end. Some candidates for these presidential elections may not have been the best choice for their respective parties, but the one that really shouts, “I should not be here” is Mr. Donald Trump. His personality and actions are not the correct ones for a president because of his temper and comments against other cultures. On the other hand, we have Mrs. Clinton who is a more competent candidate; she has more experience on the field of politics than Mr. Trump who has none at all, which are the reasons why she is a better choice as a candidate and as president of the U.S.

Jon Cozart begins his satire of the 2016 political campaigns by targeting on Hillary Clinton first. In order to understand the claims, he makes in the piece it is necessary to have an understanding of all of the different events that were happening during the campaign. Without an understanding of the political climate throughout the campaigns, Cozart’s claims are not as potent. Specifically, in Hillary’s section he uses her focus on women’s rights and her reputation as shifty as the foundation for his argument. Jon Cozart believes Hillary to be power hungry and egotistical and uses rhetorical tropes and schemes to paint this picture of Hillary.

Clinton lost because the Democratic party has let working class voters slip through the cracks. Clinton lost because the DNC threw its support behind a candidate riddled with controversy. Clinton lost because her campaign was unable to respond to a demand for populist policies and change in the Washington establishment.

Trump had “…won 50 Midwestern electoral votes that went to Barack Obama in 2012 — Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio — plus 20 more in Pennsylvania, where the two-thirds of voters beyond metro Philadelphia are Midwestern in culture and concerns.” (Barone, 2016). Due to the Democratic presidential percentage drops in the Midwest and Pennsylvania from 51 in 2012 to 45 percent in 2016 Clinton had only won or lost by a small percentage (Barone, 2016). These drops mostly came from rural areas on the outskirts of big cities such as Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Detroit. There were enough votes from the Midwestern electoral vote that it went from an 80-38 in favor of the Democratic in 2012 to an 88-30 in favor of the Republican this year (Barone, 2016). This grave mistake might have been what sealed her fate. Another factor that cost her the Midwest is that the people in the outskirts of the major cities in the Midwest value honesty. They usually react against public officials who repeated lie and try to cover it up, break laws, and defy regulations (Barone, 2016). One of the biggest things that media and Trump kept focusing on was Clintons deleted email that haunted her though out the election. Not only was this a problem for those in the Midwest but members of her own party were uneasy with the way she handled the email issue. Setting aside what others might say about Trump;

This year’s presidential election has been riddled with controversy and drama. The two presidential nominees, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump, each have questionable acts. As voting time approaches and the debates come to an end many individuals must decide who is fit to run the country. By considering their backgrounds, verifying the validity of their policies, and brining into consideration their performance in the debates, a suitable president should be found.

“One may be making a virtuous decision when choosing the lesser of two evils, but one will still find himself stuck with an evil choice.” Many Americans today find themselves in this predicament when concerning the two possible choices for President of the United States. On one hand you have Hillary Clinton who the Federal Bureau of Investigations labeled “careless” and “grossly negligent” in the handling of America's top secret information. To the contrary you have Donald Trump who has said “he would like to ban all muslims”. Both of these examples merely scratch the surface on the quality of these two candidates. Correspondingly many Americans agree that neither Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton are fit to be President of the United States.

But even with that, how was it possible for Trump to win against Hillary Clinton one of the most influential and experienced veterans in the political field to seek the presidency. She was even named recently for the 13th time by the American people as the most admired woman in the world, according to the Gallup organization (Karen Topham). Especially losing to a Republican knowing that the U.S had one of the worst congresses in recent years, also forgetting that the last two times Republicans were given a complete majority in the government were followed by two of the worst economic

In this situation, one would think that most American citizens would go through a relatively easy decision-making process: on one side of the metaphorical coin is a woman with a lifetime of service and political expertise. On the other side of the coin is a man with no political experience whatsoever, whose entire platform revolves around a mantra of sorts, “Make America Great Again,” without any true substance or concrete policy proposals. For lack of a better description, this election cycle seemed almost like a formality; the path to victory for Clinton was basically paved in gold. In a way, it almost seemed like a mockery of the system.

The results of both the 2004 and 2012 Presidential elections were the same as both incumbents were able to capitalize on the voters being comfortable with them. Additional, since both incumbents had access to national assets, four years of on the job training, and “insider information” they were able to speak in-depth on a wide range of issues both foreign and domestic. In 2004, the largest and most important issue to the nation was the war in Iraqi and in 2012 it was the nation’s economy. Given the incumbents access to firsthand information on the issues at large, they were able to weaken their opponents in the nation’s eyes by dismantling the candidate’s strategies on the issues. History has shown that nations trend to focus more on domestic

Although there are many candidates in the presidential campaign of 2016, we citizens focus most on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. They both make efforts to demonstrate ethos or credibility in their presidential bios. Furthermore, they both stress their reputations/expertise and authority to persuade the people that they are worthy to lead the nation. As Republican Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had stated in Hillary’s bio, she “ ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.” From this feedback, she showed that she can work under the conditions of the government and still go over expectations. This is a valuable skill that is claimed useful for a president and in the end, she is capable

I really did not feel compelled to write this piece, but as days passed after the election I felt like Americans needed little light shed on the situation. Tuesday night was a very nail bitter situation as millions of Americans were anxiously waiting for results,but in the wee hours of the mornings as you already know Donald Trump was declared our President. Whether you support him or not, it happened and all we can do is move forward. It is understandable to be a little frustrated at first if your candidate lost, but what I saw on social media was complete HATRED from both parties. My heart began to ache after just a few seconds of reading several posts that were filled with the same wretched lies. Hillary supporters calling every republican racist and sexist, but then republicans calling democrats upset because we can't be baby killers anymore and getting our food stamps taken away.

This election year has been a very hectic but interesting to say the least, the two candidates being either the first female president of the U.S. Hillary Clinton, or one of the most outlandish presidents Donald Trump. I was able to an interview with supporters of both candidates and asked them similar questions on why they're voting for either.