The sight of former president Bill Clinton wiping away tears of joy while standing silently behind his wife as she was making her victory speech in the 2000 Senate elections in New York may appear a little melodramatic for some. However, when one considers the sacrifices and extreme loyalty that Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton has shown to her husband over the previous 26 years, that gesture suddenly makes all the sense in world.
Secretary Clinton’s ascension to Senator, and thereafter, Secretary of State, is not something all that surprising for those that knew her, considering what a gifted child, student and political operative Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton was.
Born in Cook County and raised in suburban Park Ridge just outside of Chicago, Secretary Clinton grew up in a loving middle class family. Her early years were shaped by her Goldwater-Republican Navy veteran and business owner father and his tremendous work ethic, balanced against her mother’s Democratic leanings and harsh childhood.
At an age where young girls and boys were still too preoccupied with watching cartoons on TV, young Hillary was already busy demonstrating her leadership abilities and initiative with backyard carnivals and cookie and food drives for charity. When others her age were engrossed with the challenges of school and growing up, young Hillary was busy with the post-election canvassing of Chicago’s south side for the Republican Party. When children tread lightly around their parents and elders, she was engaged in delightfully spirited political debates with her family during dinner.
Her star continues to shine brightly at Wellesley, where her commencement address drew a seven-minute long standing ovation, and at Yale, where she was paid to intern at Washington every summer. She was already an experienced Democratic aide before even graduating from Yale, and was headhunted to be part of the Watergate impeachment inquiry team counseling House Democrats months after finishing college.
She was never a radical, beatnik or hippie, but neither was she a middle-of-the-road moderate. She is, above all, an idealist – an intelligent, disciplined, driven and practical idealist. Despite her image of a strong and uncompromising woman, people who she’s worked with reveal her to be a polite, considerate, consultative, and perhaps most surprisingly, religious individual. The latter perhaps is due to the influence of her mother and grandmother, both strong-willed Methodist women. She is also an exceptional public speaker, and can speak for an extended period of time without notes – done without pauses and filler syllables.
Over the years, many negative epithets have been used by the press and political opponents to describe her. As many have learned however, pigeonholing or underestimating Secretary Clinton often comes at a great cost.
The key to defeating Secretary Clinton lies in winning over her core support base - women, baby boomers and minorities. Meanwhile, her weakest demographic is the millennials, and this is clearly reflected in her underwhelming support online. And yet, one gets the impression that her opponents simply do not get this very simple equation. Will this prove costly in the end?
Dr Sandra Lynn Kahn, PhD, has built a successful career as an executive consultant. In her work, she has been responsible for strategic planning in a number of diverse issues, including workforce development, aviation, and justice reform. Now running as an Independent candidate for President, she runs her campaign around the slogan “Fix government, build peace”, and proposes seven key points necessary for achieving these goals. Proposing that people innately desire a world free from war for themselves and their families, she argues that the more challenging of her tasks by far is to fix government, and devotes six entrants of her seven-track strategy to that pursuit. The remaining point concerns itself with building peace, the “easier” of her ambitions.
Dr Kahn borrows from both sides of the political fence in the content of her proposals. Sounding positively conservative, she advocates the need to reduce the cost of government by 30% via the elimination of bureaucratic waste, and to return the money saved directly to the people and their communities. She speaks of a responsible government built on lean inter-agency communications and citizen input. On the other hand, while acknowledging the importance of promoting business growth, she moves to the left in calling for a closer eye on workers' safety and environmental protection. Additionally, she seeks to accomplish her overall goal – building peace – by streamlining government to that purpose, but hers is a decidedly diplomacy-oriented pursuit of peace. She calls for disarmament talks and ceasefires, citizen summits and community dialogues, with less emphasis on military strength and projection than might please a conservative ear.
In the end, with input from all sides and ideas that never stray far into extreme territory, Dr Kahn's policies are comfortably centrist and unlikely to offend any side to a vast degree. Conservatives might object to her environmental concerns and idealistic notions of only modestly armed peace, while liberals would be more likely to arch an eyebrow at her calls for streamlining government – something often taken as code for reducing its size. But there is nothing in her platform to drive voters away in droves, and ultimately, her biggest problem may be the one she shares with all third-party and unaffiliated candidates: Extremely limited name recognition.