Who will triumph in this long race? With their eyes on the presidential election in November, both the Democratic and Republican parties have begun the battle to nominate their candidates.
The policies the next leader of the U.S. will develop are of great interest to the international community. What will the U.S. be like after the Obama administration? For what goals should they aim? I would like each party to have a productive discussion on these topics and relay their thoughts to the world.
In the first fight of the Iowa caucus, the Democratic Party was caught in an even battle between Sen. Sanders, the self-proclaimed “Democratic Socialist,” and former Secretary of State Clinton, the acknowledged favorite.
Clinton, who's aiming to become the first female president, is known to have covered all her bases and established her superiority through the might of her organizational power, financial muscle, political experience and more. Her proposal involves succeeding the Obama administration on health insurance and gun control, but she’s shackled by political distrust. Facing off against her is Sanders, who flies a flag painted in strongly liberal colors, and who has made a fresh impression on youth who think the Obama administration's social policies are insufficient.
On the other side, where the Republican Party aims to recapture the administration, Sen. Cruz has taken control of the first match with his steady campaigning. As a diehard conservative, who has even criticized the leadership of his own party, he’s narrowly won out over Mr. Trump, a businessman who’s spoken bluntly and radically on immigration bans and – until this point – maintained first place in approval ratings.
I’d like to call attention to Sen. Rubio as well, who’s cut into this close contest and fought a good fight. The three each have their own distinct styles; the key is whether or not Sen. Rubio can rally the main faction of the party.
Even in unstable situations, U.S. citizens have thus far avoided radical candidates who might implement difficult policies, and made realistic choices instead. This time, both parties have fringe groups that have gained an exceptional amount of strength. I wonder if we can say this situation comes from the many citizens who harbor great discontentment toward the existing government and present inequality, and who wish for a new administration.
That said, the race has just begun. Primaries and caucuses extend beyond the March 1 "Super Tuesday," passing into the party conventions in July.
At the same time, the U.S. has a wide range of issues to resolve, from the war on terror, which has continued for 15 years after repeated terrorist attacks, to immigration and refugee policies, to economic disparity.
Above all, in an international community with considerably declined U.S. leadership, we ask what diplomatic and security measures the U.S. will take in response to Russia’s unyielding attitude and China’s steadily rising prominence. They must also prescribe solutions for the increasingly unstable world economy. Talking about only internal issues is inexcusable.
What will the U.S. look like after two terms and eight years of the Obama administration? The world is watching each and every move made by those aiming to become the new president.