As mentioned in my last article about the leading Republican candidate, Donald Trump, the leading issues in American society today are those dealing with terrorism and the economy. It is important to understand both ends of the spectrum on these issues, and with Hillary Clinton being the leading Democratic candidate it would in this case be necessary to explore her views on these topics.
Hillary Clinton, a well-known politician, was elected into the U.S. Senate from New York and was the first woman to do so in that state. Also, she was the “first wife of the president to seek and win public office.” After having run to go forth in achieving another first to be the first woman president of the United States, she instead accepted the position as U.S. Secretary of State after President Obama was elected.
Clinton’s views on how she plans to take care of matters dealing with terrorism are lined out on her website through an article discussing her plans for ISIS and global terror as a whole. Her views include getting more involved on the ground in areas of the world where terrorist groups are based out of by “ramping up airstrikes and making sure local and regional ground troops have what they need to go after ISIS and create safe spaces.”
Furthermore, her ideas about getting involved online were outlined, “ISIS and global jihadists are recruiting, training, and inciting violence on social media—breeding a growing network of terrorists around the world. The U.S. needs to work with our partners around the world to be just as savvy.” These are very important points to consider as our world becomes more digitized.
In regards to the economy, her ideas lie in strong, fair and long-term growth according to her website. By instating tax reform tax relief for working families and small businesses she hopes to develop an economy that can provide solid jobs for its citizens. Clinton also believes that “raising the minimum wage and strengthening overtime rules” is necessary.
Raising the minimum wage is a topic that has been gaining much attention in recent news. Clinton’s want to raise the minimum wage is warranted, some outlets like Forbes make valid points showing, using math, that the economy may not benefit fiscally as much as we may believe. However, the gaining inequality among incomes and the people contributing to the economy needs to be controlled. An article by the Huffington Post states “we have to acknowledge that something must be done to combat the rising inequality that is weakening our society.” Dealing with and changing the ways in which wealth is distributed throughout the population is something Clinton seems determined to accomplish.
College loans and the massive debt accumulated while trying to earn a degree in this country causes financial instability for many Americans, impacting the economy. In an article by CNBC, Mitch Daniels, the president of Purdue University and former Republican governor of Indiana, is quoted discussing this issue. He states that Americans struggling with high levels of debt “are postponing marriage, childbearing and home purchases, and…pretty evidently limiting the percentage of young people who start a business or try to do something entrepreneurial.”
Hillary Clinton wants to change this by investing money into the idea that students should not have to take out loans in order to attend public universities in their home states. Her idea to invest $350 billion would “cut interest rates on student loans and enable an estimated 25 million Americans with student debt.” This can dramatically change the health of our economy and the lives of many current and future students about to enter the workforce.
Fighting for the people who are working day in and day out in order to provide for their families and are still not able to make ends meet is part of what makes Hillary Clinton a candidate to watch. Her ability to connect with the “normal” Americans shows that she would be able to represent the people.
However, despite her well-outlined plan of action on these matters, her “likability” is constantly coming into question. This is not the first time it has impacted her chances of being elected. Why is it that her likability has consistently been put above her ability to connect with the American people’s needs? Women in positions of power are often ridiculed for their likability, which prompts the question of, why?
Sure, likability, when it comes to electing the next president, is taken into consideration no matter the gender. The problem arises when their accomplishments are overlooked because of that. We, as a society, need to make sure that we are not allowing gender stereotypes and gender inequality to subconsciously make decisions for us.
Clinton’s problem is not her likability, as she has been a part of and spearheaded many campaigns showing her compassion towards the American people. Instead, the problem is that she is a woman. Of course this is not a real problem, but a delusion that holds women back from being in positions of power in the government and beyond. Are people paying attention to the real issues at hand, or is the marginality of women at work here?