Base your vote on quality

Hillary Clinton announced Monday she will be giving the running for president of the United States a second shot.

It’s great having a woman running for president – depending on your political views – but the issue here is people are starting to see the 2016 election season as “Hillary Clinton vs. The Republicans.” We need to take a step back, look outside the gender factor and consider other candidates as well.

There are several Democrats who have either announced their bids for the presidency, expressed a serious interest in running or have officially filed with the Federal Election Commission. Jim Webb, Martin O’Malley and Joe Bidden — who still hasn’t made up his mind — are amongst these individuals.

There is even a chance a Republican can win the presidency, despite their problematic stances on serious issues. Some of the Republican candidates who have run in the past have been accused of being too liberal – they’ll have a tough time getting votes from people in their own party. Jeb Bush, who is running this time around has this issue but just because people have some qualms about electing another Bush after the last fiasco, doesn’t mean we should completely count him or the others out. Until we know more about these people, who’s to say they aren’t just as qualified as Hillary?

Hillary just might be the best candidate and it’s not like we have a lot of options to choose from so far but when it comes to picking the person who will have a huge impact on the way the country is run, you must take their policies and viewpoints into consideration. When Barack Obama ran, there were a lot of people who voted for him on the basis he was drastically different from the other candidates either age or race-wise.

This isn’t to discredit the president because he’s done a pretty good job but a lot of people didn’t know what they were getting themselves into because they didn’t do their research and they didn’t pay attention to any of his speeches or debates. We’re in danger of treating Hillary the same way. We are so hell-bent on progression that it seems we will ignore any major problems with a presidential candidate just to elect someone with different physical characteristics.

Yes we want a woman president, but people shouldn’t vote for her if her views are different from that of the people she desires to govern over. Besides, if she wins the presidency, she will have to think about what’s best for the entire country. She will advocate for women’s rights but it’s complete fantasy to think she’s going to be able to satisfy each woman’s wishes in this country. It’s important to remember that before voting so you don’t end up bitter or disappointed if she wins and halfway through her presidency she hasn’t done what you wanted her to do.

She has an impressive track record. According to the New York Times, Clinton was the first woman elected to the board of Wal-Mart and the first female politician to win a Grammy. She was more importantly “the first first lady elected to office and the first person to simultaneously serve in both the legislative and executive branches of government.”

But she has also had issues in her past campaign. Back in 2008 she was accused of lieing about being under sniper fire when she arrived in Bosnia in 1996 and with the recent e-mail scandal, she might not be seen as the most trustworthy candidate. New York Times writer William Safire wrote a column which points out all of Clinton’s lies over the years. He said he suspected the reson she deleted her emails was because she didn’t want anyone bringing up those past transgressions. It’s up to you to decide whether the good outweighs the bad.

Clinton may be the best person for the job. She’s likeable and she’s clearly interested in getting things done. All we’re asking is to consider the pros and cons before voting for someone – don’t just base your vote on gender.