By Adam Enomoto
Managing Editor
And Michael Beeli
Copy Editor
Presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton offer vastly different visions for the future of the nation. While Clinton has an impressive record of pragmatic decisions and experience in government, Trump has a background in business. The 2016 election is not a matter of partisan politics; Clinton has proven herself fit for the presidency through years of public service as a senator and secretary of state, while Trump has clearly demonstrated that he is unfit for the office.
While Clinton’s temperament has proven her to be fit for the office, Trump’s inability to serve properly as a leader of the nation was evidenced by his ABC interview following the Democratic National Convention where he made demeaning comments toward the Khan family in which he criticized the mother of fallen soldier Humayan Khan. In insulting the Gold Star family and its Muslim ties, Trump showcased his volatile temperament and proved that he is wildly unfit to be president for the country. Clinton instead tweeted that Humayan Khan is “the best of America,” displaying proper respect toward those who sacrifice their lives in service to our country.
Clinton has put forth a practical and constructive policy of immigration reform that serves to benefit all without demonizing particular groups. According to Clinton’s website, she plans to improve immigrant integration by creating an Office of Immigrant Affairs that will focus on introducing immigrants to American communities. Clinton’s proposal may not be revolutionary, but it is an incremental step toward improving American cultural compatibility.
Map: A majority of students in the country elected Clinton.
Trump’s immigration policy of constructing a border wall and “extreme vetting” of potential refugees to keep out “potential terrorists,” as evidenced by official transcripts from his candidacy announcement speech on June 16, 2015 and the second presidential debate on Oct. 9, represent a demagogic approach toward national security policy. Trump’s proposal is not only discriminatory toward a religion, which fundamentally violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but is also largely impractical.
Further evidence of Trump’s divisive nature were his comments at a rally in Bentonville, Arkansas, on Feb. 27, which implied that Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who presided over cases regarding accusations of fraud against Trump University, was unfit to rule on the cases due to his Hispanic heritage. The U.S. cannot, in good faith, elect a man who relies on bigoted rhetoric. Instead, the country should focus on electing Clinton, who has proven herself a reasonable and dedicated public servant.
According to the nonpartisan fact-checking website Politifact, Clinton has 34 political statements that are factually untrue, while Trump has a total of 153. Although Clinton has not been completely honest, Trump is clearly far more untrustworthy, and his excessive lying presents real danger to his credibility as a candidate.
Clinton’s resume clearly shows she is the qualified candidate.
Clinton’s tax plan focuses on balancing the national budget and returning more gains to the middle and lower classes by increasing taxes on the top 1%. According to her campaign website, Clinton seeks to reduce income inequality by ensuring that those who make over $1 million annually pay at least 30% in taxes, restoring estate tax parameters to 2009 levels to include more of the wealthy families in the tax and ending the Bermuda Reinsurance Loophole, which allows businesses and corporations to transfer assets outside of the U.S. to take advantage of tax loopholes.
According to the Tax Policy Center, Clinton’s tax plan would reduce the national deficit by $1.4 trillion over the next decade, while Trump’s tax plan would reduce federal revenues by $6.2 trillion in the same time frame with most of the savings going to the top 1% of highest income households. Clinton evidently is more realistic in preparing to resolve major budget issues faced by the country.
According to a demographic analysis by the Washington Post, Trump’s supporters skewed toward white males who earn less than $50,000 annually. Although Trump has been effective in gathering their support, his premier tax policy of capping the business tax at 15% and abolishing the estate tax will send the greatest gains to the highest-income households, according to the Tax Policy Center. Evidently, Trump’s policies are designed to benefit the wealthiest of Americans, and his appeal to the middle class working voter is not consistent with his fiscal policy.
Clinton is the obvious choice because she is a realist who believes America can’t simply withdraw behind walls but must engage confidently in the world to protect its interests, which include helping others escape poverty and oppression. Clinton has proposed pragmatic and inclusive policies to lead the country in the right direction and is far more qualified than Trump.
Leave a Reply