Candidates still dodging the issues - analysis of candidate websites

By: relawson
Published On: 4/28/2007 9:34:26 PM

I will be supporting a Democratic candidate for president.  That said, I think it is important to take a close look on the top three candidates inability or unwillingness to communicate where they stand on the issues most important to Americans. 

As many of you know, some of the most important issues to me are offshoring of American jobs, trade imbalances, and the replacement of American workers with cheap and exploited foreign "guest" workers on H-1b and L1 visas. 

My analysis below is going to be more broad covering all the issues - and based upon a visit to each candidates website.  Their website is the best place to communicate their positions on the issues - and they are not limited to 30 second spots.  Their websites are their opportunity to say everything they wish - yet they DON'T!

I won't be critiquing what position they are taking, rather their ability to communicate where they stand.  Let's start with Senator Obama.
########### OBAMA ############
Senator Obama takes a stand on a variety of issues, including strengthening America's position overseas, his desire to end the Iraq war, stopping a culture of corruption, energy conservation, supporting veterans, and a number of other important issues. 

Instead of analyzing each of those positions, I would like to mention one important issue that is noticeably absent: labor and the middle class.  Labor groups have a long history of supporting Democrats.  If Obama thinks he can win this election without labor's support he is horribly wrong.  Why doesn't the Senator's website list his positions on issues important to labor?  Other issues noticeably absent include immigration, taxes, our mounting trade and budget deficits, globalization, and a variety kitchen table issues. 

Senator Obama, in my oppinion, needs to walk and chew gum at the same time.  He needs to be able to discuss in detail both foreign policy issues and domestic issues.  I think he has proven a light-weight, so far, on the domestic side.  I give Senator Obama a C on communicating his positions on the issues through his campaign website.

########## CLINTON ##########
Senator Clinton is the candidate that I have a sour taste for.  That said, my analysis of her website won't include my personal views of her politics.

Unfortunately I cannot do analysis of the Senator's website on the issues, because her website DOES NOT have a section detailing the issues.  I give Senator Clinton an F- as of today when it comes to communicating her positions on important issues to the voters through her campaign website.  Does she simply expect us to vote for her because she is Hillary Clinton - the former first lady?  Please!

########## EDWARDS #########
OK, I have a soft spot for Senator Edwards.  Recently, that spot has hardened some because of his inability to communicate where he stands on issues important to me. 

As far as his website goes, it leaves much to be desired.  His website is essentially the opposite of Senator Obama.  Senator Edwards is very light on foreign policy issues.  Unfortunately, although we know from his past work that he is stronger on middle class issues - he does a horrible job explaining where he stands on specific issues.  His entire issues page is literally five paragraphs.  Since I gave Obama a C for his ability to communicate the issues in his website, I am forced to give Senator Edwards a D-. 

########## SUMMARY ###########
Senator Clinton was to busy to grace us with her positions on her website.  She flunks out.  Senator Edwards is running for President yet is unable to write more than five paragraphs on his positions so he gets a D-.  Senator Obama fails to even mention the middle class or have a section for labor issues.  Because he goes into details in other areas, I give him a C.

The bottom line is that each of these candidates are failures when it comes to communicating where they stand on the issues.  How can smart and analytical people - like most bloggers are - even begin to decide which candidate is the best if they can't do something as simple as telling us where (specifically) they stand??  We should demand more of them.  They aren't running for Miss America - so vague answers like "World Peace" and "Ending Poverty" aren't good enough.  I want details.


Comments