|← Governors and Senators||Political Ideologies →|
Surprising as it may seem, studies have reveled that women governors are even turning out to be more appealing for the presidency than their male counterparts. Women are very adaptive and they can easily bring others along (Liswood, 2008). Women are also good listeners and this is a good trait for a president for they need to listen to listen to lead others well. Women have for long been known for building consensus and they also easily can reach to a compromise. Additionally, they possess the much needed executive branch experience.
According to Liswood (2008), just like the former president of Ireland, Mary Robinson, women leaders have survival skills that allow them to bring outsiders to table and comfortably work with them. As minority, women look at the world a slightly different manner as compared to men, who have been in powers for the better part of history and will want to perform differently. However no woman has ever been the president of U.S.A. but there time is coming, who knew that an African-American would come out strongly against the opponents and become the president at some point?
As opposed to senators, the lack of voting record on crucial issues that are sometimes controversial clears governors of a lot of blames and allegations. The Senate has many exclusive powers that enable the members carry out certain duties. They include: consenting to treaties before their ratification, confirmation or consenting appointments such as those of federal judges, Cabinet secretaries, military officers, other federal executive officials among other duties. They also debate on bills either originating from the House of Representatives o r from Senate itself (The U.S. Constitution, 2001).
Although controversial some of the bills that are voted for or against are very critical and directly touch on the lives of Americans (Associated Press, 1995. A good example of such bills is the Hospital tax bill that was passed after a bitter fight. This was on the floor of Georgia Senate. The bill sought to impose a hospital tax to aid fill a $600 million that existed in medical funding. It therefore imposed a 1.45 percent tax on each patient’s revenue (Suggs, 2010). This could raise approximately $170 million. Such bills have both opponents and proponents among the public. Consequently if a majority of the public are against a given bill, it is most likely that the senators perceived to be strongly behind them will lose public support whenever they want to vie. Sometimes the way Senators vote create a public enmity hence making them less appealing for presidency.
On the contrary, senators normally don’t have the individual political-administrative accomplishments upon which they can point. They additionally have records that are dotted with polarized and controversial votes. Additionally, senators have typically made many enemies on a national level (Wright, 2008).
Nevertheless, the notion of the governors being the best presidential candidates is slowly changing and senators are gradually picking up as the people’s favorites for the job. Senators are now being viewed as attractive and viable presidential candidates distinct from previous circumstances (Harris, 1959). Putting aside the fact that Obama is only the third president in history to go directly from the Senate to the White House, it is projected that similar situations will be witnessed in future.
Martins (2002) observes that the reason behind this change in mind is that seemingly the voters of United States of America are seeking the opposite of the present leadership and administration’s approach to governing. They desire a president that who is flexible as opposed to being rigid. They also want someone who can work with others across the board despite the enmity that might exist. A senator has also been seen as less divisive, who does not “go-it-alone” just like the electorates want according to researches that have been carried on the traits they desire in their leaders. They also see senators as people who accomplish a lot through compromise are less ideologically stubborn. In the senate, no senator can go their own but they must reach out and get others so that they can together raise the required votes to pass legislation.
Adjusting to new ideas, adapting, flexibility and listening are the traits desired for a president because the electorates claim that have witnessed the damage done by leaders not possessing these traits. The nature of the senators work will most probably allow them inculcated the skills (Harris, 1959). The voters now have a willingness to let go of the desire for an experienced executive who has been charged with running the government, working within a budget and sometimes having had a complex organization to handle. It is true that most senators may lack a combination of all these experiences but the president has to have both the senatorial and executive experiences. It is also very true that few typical governors will have all these combinations. Many typical governors don’t have experience in foreign policy and this presents them with a setback.
Lawrence (1966) affirms that in most cases, almost all, that a governor has become the president of the United States of America, he has spend most of his first two years in office trying to get comprehensive understanding of knowledge concerning relations of the Congress and the Executive. They have to acquire intimate knowledge on how the Congress and the Executive relate in order to run the affairs of the state in a right manner. Any particular governor with the responsibility of a state office and is ambitious of presidential nomination has to begin studying national and international problems for proper statesmanship.
To sum up the discussion it is important to note that governors have been preferred over senators for presidency of the United States of America. The reasons behind this are very clear; the first one is due to governors’ accomplishment s that can easily be cited. Secondly their serving as chief Executive Officers of large government organizations gives them experience to head the nation. The last and equally important reason is that they lack a voting record on crucial and controversial national issues. On the other hand, Senators lack individual political-administrative accomplishments they can point at. To add to this, their records are often dotted with polarized and controversial votes.
However, governors are equally handicapped because they are normally not very familiar with politics that are based outside of their own states hence requiring them a lot of time to get support in other states. A senator with political prominence has friends across members of congress from other sates. Therefore success in presidency and leadership in general, largely depends on individual capacity (Lawrence, 1966).