The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Editorial | Our Primary picks: Clinton and McCain

Hillary Clinton has the experience necessary to achieve her vision

Pennsylvania Democrats are confronted with a tragedy of riches: two incredibly appealing candidates for their Party's nomination.

We want to believe that Sen. Barack Obama can accomplish all he promises. His soaring rhetoric and compelling vision have inspired us and many other students.

But while Obama's charisma far outshines that of Sen. Hillary Clinton, her public service, political experience and tenacity tell us not only "Yes we can" but also "How we can." As such, we endorse Clinton for the Democratic Party's nomination for president.

Our endorsement is not a rejection of Obama's leadership qualities. But choosing the president of the United States is too important a decision to make based on hope alone. After finishing his term in the Senate and better showing us what he can do for the American people, Obama could one day be a remarkable president.

Clinton, on the other hand, is ready to lead this nation now. A successful champion for change, her experience in the Senate and as first lady gives her a better understanding of how Washington works. She has the ability to turn policy into reality. And her mastery of causes central to the Democratic Party's platform makes her better suited to challenge presumptive Republican nominee John McCain.

Take her leadership on health-care issues. In 1993, then-first lady Clinton urged America to embrace universal health care during her keynote speech at Penn's commencement. Unfortunately, she was far ahead of the times. Her proposal was met with fierce resistance and ultimately rejected.

Refusing to give up, Clinton helped to expand children's health insurance in the late 90's instead. More than a decade later, her new policies - and the concept of universal health care itself - enjoy wider support because of her past work. Indeed, of all the candidates still in the race, she offers the most comprehensive health care proposal. And as with most of her plans, she also has a way to fund it.

Some doubt Clinton's ability to bring the country together. But, in New York, her senatorial campaigns united a surprisingly wide coalition of supporters across political and socioeconomic boundaries. She can do the same this November.

Others are concerned with her support for the Iraq War Resolution. But since then, she has pressed the Bush administration for accountability and demanded a responsible end to the war. She also has far more exposure to national security and foreign policy.

Ultimately, we are confident in Clinton's ability to implement her agenda. It's this quality that has brought leaders like Mayor Michael Nutter and Governor Ed Rendell to her side. And it's this quality that convinces us to support her as well.

John McCain is a principled and independent leader

By now, Senator John McCain has all but locked up the Republican nomination.

But we were rooting for him all along.

As one of the few Republican candidates to recognize the problem of global warming, understand the promises of stem-cell research and take a principled stand against torture, McCain has often openly defied his Party's conservative base.

That independence and willingness to cross party lines is attractive to a generation tired of partisan bickering in the White House and on Capitol Hill.

More importantly, McCain's unparalleled foreign policy experience put him head-and-shoulders above the other Republican candidates in the field.

The Arizona senator not only criticized the failed Rumsfeld strategy early-on in the Iraq War, but also supported a politically unpopular surge that later proved successful.

In short, McCain has the experience and credibility necessary to lead our country in the War on Terror without tarnishing America's image abroad.

It's not just that McCain's policies often appeal to people on both sides of the political aisle.

The Senator has also brought a much-needed sense of honesty and candor to the 2008 election season.

During his visit here last November, McCain wasn't afraid to give straight answers or admit that he disagreed with students on certain issues. After all, there's a reason they call his campaign the Straight Talk Express.

His personality is reflected in his steadfast (and sometimes obstinate) stance on the Iraq War. Still, it's refreshing to see a leader who is willing to stand up for his principles, even when those principles become unpopular.

With high registration and turnout numbers for Democrats, an unpopular incumbent and a faltering economy, many pundits have argued that the Arizona Senator faces an uphill battle.

But if McCain continues to play up his foreign-policy credentials and capture the attention of America's centrist middle, he will prove a major force to reckon with in the general election.

This is part four of a four-part series. On Monday, we had a guest column by Senator John McCain. On Tuesday, we had a guest column by Senator Hillary Clinton. On Wednesday, we had a guest piece by Senator Barack Obama.

Comments (176)

This is one of the most thought out, but simple endorsements I've seen. I agree it is a difficult choice, but coming from MA where I voted for the first time in my life for inspiration in our governor's race, I can tell you I was wrong. Inspiration is not translating into legislation. Choosing to base my vote for governor on inspiration in my state was not a high stakes risk, but to attempt to do so in a presidential election is and it is a risk I am not willing to take at that level. Thank you for recognizing that this Democrat Nomination can be summed up as substance vs. inspiration race and that it is clear that what we need is substance over inspiration at a time when this country is a disaster all of its own.

Of course you endorse McCain because he has "defied" the conservative base of the GOP. DP is such a liberal rag.

I watched the Debate with in a room with Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans would get enraged at Obama's "cluelessness" about Obama's views on social security, capital gains tax, etc. The Democrats would sporadically cheer one or another forward. We had a long discussion afterwards. Ultimately, the Clinton supporters brought the Obama supporters to bear on issues such as whether or not he keeps talking the talk but not walking the walk. His actions not matching his words. After a debate that began heated and became calmly intellectual, they agree that his tactics have been on no "higher ground" than Clinton's, except he talks of taking the moral high road, so it is easier to paint a prettier picture on his tactics. Clinton's supporters also made some concessions, particularly that her campaign has not been run as well as it should have been. And that she has a lot of preconceived ideas about her along with a lot of baggage that is weighing her down. The most outspoken Repubican of the bunch said that the Democratic Party leaders were to blame because they didn't see what they had in Hillary, and they should have helped Obama get ready to run in 4 or 8 years. They felt the Democratic Party could have had the White House for 16 years running if handled well. Now they say the Democrats have yet again yanked defeat from the jaws of victory. By the end of the night, the consensus was that Hillary Clinton was the best choice for president. Some "liked" Obama better, some "respected" McCain's war record more. But all agreed that she was by far the most well versed and most intelligent of the bunch, but intelligence mixed with good sense and experience to be able to get the job done, and done well.

I am glad to see this endorsement. Everyone talks about the impact of negative campaigning on Obama if he is the nominee, but no one talks about the impact on Clinton if she is the nominee. Her unfavorable rating is up because of the media and their biased reporting!

Hillary is the only candidate who is Brilliant and with overall experience to run the country. She has also been vetted enough and is strong as steel in her resolve and steadfastness. I really admire her tenacity. OBama is nothing compared to her.

[QUOTE id="286fc0d1-7a02-4da0-8c1d-99057abbf096"]I watched the Debate with in a room with Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans would get enraged at Obama's "cluelessness" about Obama's views on social security, capital gains tax, etc. The Democrats would sporadically cheer one or another forward. We had a long discussion afterwards. Ultimately, the Clinton supporters brought the Obama supporters to bear on issues such as whether or not he keeps talking the talk but not walking the walk. His actions not matching his words. After a debate that began heated and became calmly intellectual, they agree that his tactics have been on no "higher ground" than Clinton's, except he talks of taking the moral high road, so it is easier to paint a prettier picture on his tactics. Clinton's supporters also made some concessions, particularly that her campaign has not been run as well as it should have been. And that she has a lot of preconceived ideas about her along with a lot of baggage that is weighing her down. The most outspoken Repubican of the bunch said that the Democratic Party leaders were to blame because they didn't see what they had in Hillary, and they should have helped Obama get ready to run in 4 or 8 years. They felt the Democratic Party could have had the White House for 16 years running if handled well. Now they say the Democrats have yet again yanked defeat from the jaws of victory. By the end of the night, the consensus was that Hillary Clinton was the best choice for president. Some "liked" Obama better, some "respected" McCain's war record more. But all agreed that she was by far the most well versed and most intelligent of the bunch, but intelligence mixed with good sense and experience to be able to get the job done, and done well.[/QUOTE] Thank you for sharing your experience, and the thoughts that prevailed last night in the group you were with. I sincerly hope that this type of level headed discussion will prevail from this point forward. This election is so important that we must all ask ourselves to re-examine our positions, and the candidates we support. We must all be sure we are living up to the awesome responsibility we have when we cast our votes.

I have to give credit where credit is due. I assumed the DP would jump on the Obama bandwagon and give him an endorsement based on nothing more than his promises of hope and change. You have proven me wrong and done it in a remarkable way. This endorsement of Sen. Clinton is obviously thought out and very well written. She is absolutely ready to be president and I just cannot say that about Obama (yet). Well done DP.

What an insightful piece! I totally agree. For a while I was for charismatic Obama. However,as the campaign progressed, I realized that Clinton would be the best president. She offers solutions to current concerns; she has the experience and has also shown tenacity and strong will. America's smart choice for president: HILLARY CLINTON!

Thank you for seeing what many Americans and Pensylvanians are seeing. While I do not think Sen. Clinton is Mother Theresa, her tanacity alone is enough to get my vote here in Honesdale, PA (a small town). I am gratified to see that our fellow Pensylvanians are beginning to see thru Mr. Obama who. We keep learning about his misdeeds that I only with the mainstream media would not ignore. Obama's friendship with the self-proclaimed Pentagon terrorist, William C. Ayers is enought to get me upset. My fellow Pensylvanians: Please vote for Clinton and send a message that we will not tolerate anyone who is "frindly" with a terrorist. God Bless, Jim Served 2 tours in Iraq

Corrected typos: Thank you for seeing what many Americans and Pennsylvanians are seeing. While I do not think Sen. Clinton is Mother Theresa, her tenacity alone is enough to get my vote here in Honesdale, PA (a small town). I am gratified to see that our fellow Pennsylvanians are beginning to see thru Mr. Obama who. We keep learning about his misdeeds that I only with the mainstream media would not ignore. Obama's friendship with the self-proclaimed Pentagon terrorist, William C. Ayers is enough to get me upset. My fellow Pennsylvanians: Please vote for Clinton and send a message that we will not tolerate anyone who is "friendly" with a terrorist. Please check this site to learn more about Mr. Obama: http://www.obamaunveiled.com God Bless, Jim Served 2 tours in Iraq

A wise--and sober--choice. Obama needs more time, more experience, more vetting. He's not ready. Clinton is. I agree that Obama needs more time to ready himself for

Are you guys out of your minds ? Bosnia-gate, Mark Penn and Colombia. The republicans want her as the candidate because she is more beatable But all this doesn't matter because she's already lost the nomination

You have helped me tremendously in clarifying my thoughts and I will now cast my all important vote for HILLARY. I wasn't a fence sitter but, to be honest, I was leaning towards Obama. The debate last night and your fair and concise reasoning in the editorial made it patently clear to me that Hillary deserves my vote and I am praying that others will get off the obama bandwagon hoopla and vote for the one that has what it takes to make real changes. Perhaps one day obama will be seasoned and mature enough but he's not now. This country just cannot afford having a president who will need on the job training. Thank you!

HILLARY is the best candidate for the democrats. I hope PA will give her a BIG WIN. AS TINA TURNER SINGS, SHE is simply the best http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCG5Tp4ZwZI

As a voter who was undecided over the weekend, after watching last night's debate and reading this editorial, it's hard not to support Hillary.

I agree that Hillary is more experienced and more electable than Obama. Using Jovis' words, Hillary seems to be very steady and determinable. About her baggage, yes, she has baggage, but we all know what�?s inside the baggage and she�?s been tested for many years. Whereas, Obama�?s baggage still getting more and more, and it�?s unknown what�?s inside. Many people still remember about his pastor story that�?s not been completely answered as to why he didn�?t take care long before the public found out from the media. That is related to his leadership. How he deals with problems around his inner circle? Is he strong or weak when it comes to make decision on this particular issue?

I don't know what to make of the other comments on this thread. As a Penn alum (C/W'02), I'm disappointed in the editorial, but it's just a reflection of whatever handful of students happen to be on the editorial board (right? who makes these decisions, anyway?), so c'est la vie. The commenters, on the other hand - I'm not sure what to make of them. Penn students or Clinton interlopers from other sites? I ask just because the comments seem pretty inane. How exactly is this editorial an insightful piece? "Choosing the president of the United States is too important a decision to make based on hope alone" is about as hackneyed an argument against Obama as there is out there. The one arguably less standard aspect of this editorial - crediting Clinton for increasing national support for universal health care - is laughable. I don't doubt that she cares about the issue, but any currency the idea currently has in America exists despite her completely failed advocacy in the early 90's, not because of it.

Just read about this endorsement on www.politico.com. I'm also surprised (and impressed) that the dp didn't jump on the obamawagon. It's good to see that you are demanding the HOW behind the candidate promises. I also agree that Obama needs to prove himself more on the national stage before he's ready for the highest office in the land. With all of his good qualities, I think Obama could be a great president. But I don't think he's ready yet. Personally, though, I think I'm a center-right independent and I like McCain (though I disagree with a number of his positions, I think he would bring integrity to the office, something sorely missing for quite some time). cheers!

Right on, DP! Clinton's oft-ridiculed 1993 failed healthcare plan had the critical flaw of being "ahead of the times" as you put it. She's the candidate with the tenacity, competence and Washington know-how to make universal healthcare a reality, to responsibly end two wars, to resuscitate the economy, and tackle the other big issues. She deserves the nomination. I hope, if she gets it, she'll ask Obama to be VP. With some experience under his belt, I believe he'll take the Oval Office one day himself. He can still run 6 or 7 more times before he's even McCain's age! Right now, though, he's not ready and would be dominated by McCain's significant experience (his "half-century of public service" were Obama's own words!) come November.

I totally agreed that, and from last night of the debate, we see Hillary should be able in day one to represent our nation, and will bring us back to the right track for what we should be.

I just don't understand how you could endorse her candidacy at this point. One sure way to tell how a candidate will act when they take office is how they run their campaign. Obama has run a tight, persistent campaign that has for the most part stayed on message and on budget. Senator Clinton has run a disorganized campaign built by sleaze like Mark Penn that has far too often shown itself to be use Rovian and Atwateresque tactics that were used to great effect on her and her husband. She's been erratic, occasionally testy, and shows an appalling lack of transparency in her actions. Her campaign clearly values loyalty over competency, a trait far too similar to the current disaster of an administration. As for her being "tested", I guess that is true, if you mean all of her and Bill's flaws have already been aired. But go ahead, keep living in the past. Experience is overrated, especially in regards to the office of the President. For example, one former president had ten years in Congress, 11 years in the Senate, was the Ambassador to Russia and Great Britain, and served four years as Secretary of State. Another had only 8 years as a state legislator, and a forgettable 2 year term in Congress. The first person was James Buchanan, the second Abraham Lincoln. Experience is nice, but not one of the most important qualities you need for the Presidency. In addition, what metric are you using for experience? Going by elected office, Obama has more experience than her. She has only served 4 more years than him in the Senate. Her one moment to show true leadership in 2002 she blew completely, either incompetently falling for the duplicitous lies of the Bush Administration, or absolutely content to get us into a mess we had no justification to get us into. Who says she won't show this lack of moral strength to keep us out of another pointless war in Iran? Why is that people complain so much about how Washingtonites just don't understand things, yet clamor that our leaders need MORE of that kind of experience?

Thank you Pennsylvania for a well-reasoned, very intelligent decision. Years of experience as public servant and understanding what Americans of all walks of life are facing is an extremely important quality in a president. She already knows the faces in Washington,how they think, their goals @ needs, and how to work with both parties to resolve isssues and get bills passed. She has 35 military generals, commanders, captains, etc who also think she can be a good commander-in-chief. This is probably one of the most important statements and qualities that needs to be addressed to Americans! Hillary is very passionate about her goals and she stands firm about the issues we face. I admire her integrity and faith that she always takes with her in any challenge. I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO THANK ABC FOR SUCH A FAIR AND OPEN DEBATE!!! This is the first debate I've seen that Obama wasn't given a pillow and the easy questions. Hillary has always been under attack by CNN and MSNBC and it was time Obama had to answer for some of his behavior. THANKS TO PENN AND ABC!!

I disagree with your assertion that Clinton will be able to build a broad coalition in the fall. She currently has a >55% disapproval rating and poll after poll finds that people think she is untrustworthy. These numbers only increase as she continues to run negative ads about Obama. Obama, on the otherhand, has attempted (not always successfully) to run a clean and optimistic campaign. He has higher approval ratings and is found to be trustworthy. I think he will have a much greater chance of succeeding in the fall, and because that is our ultimate goal, it is clear that it is time to coalesce behind him.

I totally agreed that, and from last night of the debate, we see Hillary should be able in day one to represent our nation, and will bring us back to the right track for what we should be.

Line up the three candidates at face value -- minus the endorsements and the polls. Look at their track records, experience, substance, thorough knowledge of the issues, and solutions to the problems that face our nation and the world -- HILLARY HANDS DOWN is best tested and prepared to lead our country. Her years of selfless commitment and hard work for Americans deserves much more recognition and respect. Passion and experience must count for something, especially when we are choosing our nation's next president. Obama is a good candidate, but he needs more seasoning.