Even though political campaign ads on television have yet to outnumber the ads for prescription drugs, the 2008 presidential race sometimes seems to be in full swing.
Even though
political campaign ads on television have yet to outnumber the ads for
prescription drugs, the 2008 presidential race sometimes seems to be in full
swing.
The past has
shown us that now is the time for citizens who are concerned about the direction
the country is heading to communicate their value-driven convictions to those
who would like to occupy the White House.
As illustrated by
their shifting positions, politicians are not immovable objects; they can be
enlightened.
And one of the
greatest opportunities to impact a politician is while he or she is still a
candidate. They are especially open to perspectives other than their own during
the primary campaign season, when viewpoints are still being formed and
positions staked out. Some have been known to switch positions completely.
In a piece he
wrote for the Weekly Standard (Feb. 26, 2007), Fred Barnes observes that when
politicians switch positions they “usually stay switched.” He notes that when
Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush became pro-life, they stayed pro-life in
their presidencies. And when Bill Clinton and Al Gore moved into the pro-choice
camp, they stayed there.
These candidates
did not change their positions by chance. They were convinced to do so by
outside influences. We have heard this year that one of the candidates switched
his position on embryonic stem cell research when he heard a callous statement
by a scientist on the fate of human embryos in the lab.
Americans who
hold to biblical values have every right to be making their presence and
preferences known to those who are in the race for the highest office in the
land.
Now is the time
to get ahead of the spin. Perhaps more than at any other time in our nation’s
history, the candidates running for president appear to be willing to listen to
and consider opposing viewpoints – in hopes of getting an edge on their
competitors in what appears to be the most wide-open race for the White House
in nearly a century.
Presidential
campaigns, perhaps by necessity, kick into high gear – thus insulating the
anointed candidates from the populace – earlier than any other run for public
office. In the past two presidential elections, the major party candidates have
been decided before the cherry trees around the capital’s tidal basin burst into
bloom.
In 2000, after a
cold start in New Hampshire – John McCain won
a resounding victory there – George W. Bush’s campaign began to pick up steam,
posting wins in California, Ohio,
Missouri, Georgia
and Maryland.
While McCain captured several other contests in New
England states, his campaign was out of steam by early March and
Bush coasted into his party’s nominating convention in August.
For all practical
purposes, John Kerry had sewn up his party’s nomination in March 2004, with
John Edwards taking the perennial bridesmaid role and Howard Dean undone by his
primal screech. On the GOP side, the incumbent George W. Bush was a shoo-in.
With many
candidates and no clear leaders, the 2008 election season may be different,
offering a few more weeks before each side’s winner is declared. Yet several
key states have moved their primaries earlier in the year.
While it is
debatable whether any of these early bird primaries and caucuses will determine
the two major parties’ nominees, they will establish some clear winners and
losers.
Iowa still leads the nation in the
presidential sweepstakes with its caucuses being held on Jan. 14 – about 10
months away. Democrats will caucus in Nevada
on Jan. 19. The first-in-the-nation primary is traditionally in New Hampshire – so far no other state has leapfrogged the
GraniteState
– and is slated for Jan. 22, followed by South
Carolina on January 29.
Then the
floodgates open with Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota,Oklahoma
and Utah
scheduled to hold primaries on Feb. 5. Michigan
and Pennsylvania
are considering a move to that date, which would effectively constitute a
national primary day.
Many more states
will have held their primary by the second week of March.
While some may
worry it is too early in the process to get involved, there is no time like the
present to voice your opinion. Before you know it, it will be time for you to
go to the polls and vote your values, beliefs and convictions.
Why wait to make
a decision based on choices made by others? Why not get involved and try to
change the candidates’ perspectives now? Both parties can use more help than
all the people of faith in America
can give them.
By interacting
with the candidates now, you can influence the decision-making process much
earlier, and you may well find that it will lessen the chance that you will be
asking yourself on Election Day, “Why am I being forced once again to choose
between the lesser of two evils?” or “Why don’t I have a better choice?”