2008 Woodie Awards
Hillary's debate flub reveals lack of leadership
Aanston Frazier
Issue date: 11/7/07 Section: Editorials
- Page 1 of 1
On Oct. 30, the Democratic candidates for president held a debate designed to show who would be most fit to be the next nominee for their party's presidential candidate.
Hillary Clinton, the current frontrunner and assumed nominee, was asked a question about driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Her answer demonstrated the lack of leadership and resolve that her opponents, both Republican and Democrat, have used against her for some time.
Eliot Spitzer, the Democratic governor of New York, had proposed a plan to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Hillary, when asked by a New Hampshire newspaper, said the plan was "a good idea." Yet when pressed during the debate for her opinion, she was for it, and then against it, then no one was quite sure.
Her indecisiveness while trying to answer a simple question underscores a major problem with Hillary Clinton; she tries to appease everyone but is incapable of actual leadership. With immigration a major issue in this country, one has to take a stand one way or the other on issues dealing with it, even if they are unpopular. Especially if you want a leadership position such as president.
Those who have been against Clinton for some time are aware of this problem. She tries to appease everyone without being willing to actually take a stand on issues. On main issues no one is quite sure where she stands, as she has taken multiple sides and sometimes, as with the driver's licenses for illegal aliens question, she does so in the span of under two minutes.
In the week since the debate, Republicans, as well as her Democratic rivals for president, have attacked her indecisiveness. Yet Clinton's campaign, instead of addressing these criticisms, has played the victim card by attacking those labeling the criticisms as making unfair attacks against her.
What would she do if, as president, she had to make a tough decision on a particular situation? Would she try to poll everyone first to make sure they agreed? Would she try to make sure no one was upset with her decision? Or maybe she would just say that having to make a tough decision is an unfair attack.
That's not leadership, which is required if one wants to be president.
Clinton's entire campaign has been about trying to have it both ways on issues. Whenever pressed on key issues, she turns the question around and plays the victim card, just as she has done in the aftermath of her debate flub.
That's not something anyone should want from someone trying to get elected to a position of authority.
But it is exactly what has been expected from Hillary.
- Aanston Frazier, a former Marine Corps intelligence analyst, is a junior economics and political science major and a Mirror columnist.
Hillary Clinton, the current frontrunner and assumed nominee, was asked a question about driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Her answer demonstrated the lack of leadership and resolve that her opponents, both Republican and Democrat, have used against her for some time.
Eliot Spitzer, the Democratic governor of New York, had proposed a plan to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Hillary, when asked by a New Hampshire newspaper, said the plan was "a good idea." Yet when pressed during the debate for her opinion, she was for it, and then against it, then no one was quite sure.
Her indecisiveness while trying to answer a simple question underscores a major problem with Hillary Clinton; she tries to appease everyone but is incapable of actual leadership. With immigration a major issue in this country, one has to take a stand one way or the other on issues dealing with it, even if they are unpopular. Especially if you want a leadership position such as president.
Those who have been against Clinton for some time are aware of this problem. She tries to appease everyone without being willing to actually take a stand on issues. On main issues no one is quite sure where she stands, as she has taken multiple sides and sometimes, as with the driver's licenses for illegal aliens question, she does so in the span of under two minutes.
In the week since the debate, Republicans, as well as her Democratic rivals for president, have attacked her indecisiveness. Yet Clinton's campaign, instead of addressing these criticisms, has played the victim card by attacking those labeling the criticisms as making unfair attacks against her.
What would she do if, as president, she had to make a tough decision on a particular situation? Would she try to poll everyone first to make sure they agreed? Would she try to make sure no one was upset with her decision? Or maybe she would just say that having to make a tough decision is an unfair attack.
That's not leadership, which is required if one wants to be president.
Clinton's entire campaign has been about trying to have it both ways on issues. Whenever pressed on key issues, she turns the question around and plays the victim card, just as she has done in the aftermath of her debate flub.
That's not something anyone should want from someone trying to get elected to a position of authority.
But it is exactly what has been expected from Hillary.
- Aanston Frazier, a former Marine Corps intelligence analyst, is a junior economics and political science major and a Mirror columnist.
Be the first to comment on this story