Political party platforms and presidential candidate manifestos are the subjects of a second nearly completed new book. Following the news and actions of political parties and their candidates in the Election 2016 cycle produces much substance for analysis and consideration.
I have been working on the idea that there are differences between political party platforms and individual candidate manifestos. I segregate the use of "platforms" from "manifestos" for clarity in discussion and comparison.
As political parties approach their respective national conventions from which they select their nominees, they try to reconcile their differences.
Presumably, presidential nominees will align with that of their sponsoring parties, and the result will be a president's management agenda that is in harmony with that of their partners in Congress.
In a democratic, pluralistic government, which is the U.S., a certain degree of elasticity is expected from bipartisanship and negotiated trade-offs.
One might expect that a large part of a political party's platform will represent core values. Some parts will represent responsiveness to current needs. A presidential candidate's manifesto might be expected to contain actionable contents that will constitute priorities, plans, and schedules.
The president's manifesto should be developed well in advance such that citizens have the opportunity to vet the contents and to interrogate candidates about pending policies, priorities, and programs.
What voters witness today is more of a last minute hodge-podge with much misalignment. Such conditions lead to disharmony and dysfunctional government."
Trump's approach, "just let me handle it," is insufficient.
“Donald Trump wants to make America great again. This is how he wants to do it:
If Trump were elected president, he says, he would launch the U.S. government into a massive building project — and a massive manhunt — both at once.
On the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump would build a long, impenetrable wall. In the rest of the country, he would pressure the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants to “self-deport” — and, if they don't, round them up to deport en masse. Later, Trump says, “the good ones” could come back.
He also wants to go on a building spree.
Modern new VA hospitals. Better bridges, highways, railroads. A new floor at LaGuardia Airport, to replace that shabby terrazzo Trump hates. And, to pay for it all, Trump would not raise taxes. He’d lower them.
Instead, Trump would get other countries to start paying the United States large new sums of money — and agree to receive nothing in return. China, for instance, would pay for new tariffs. Mexico would even pay for America’s new border wall.
“They’re not going to pay for the wall,” Fox News host Bill O’Reilly told Trump this summer.
“You have to let me handle that, okay?” Trump said.”
No surprises, please.
“Clinton’s platform comes into focus, including some surprises
04/15/15 08:00 AM
By Steve Benen
The conventional wisdom suggests Hillary Clinton, lacking a credible primary rival, will effectively run a general-election campaign for the next year and a half. The Democratic frontrunner, who’s never been the most liberal member of the party, will have the luxury of aiming for the center, much to the chagrin of the party’s progressive base. But as Clinton’s campaign gets underway this week, it may be time to reassess those assumptions. Joy-Ann Reid reported from Iowa yesterday:
Clinton … articulated four pillars of her still-to-come campaign platform; four “big fights” she foresees on the horizon: building “the economy of tomorrow, not yesterday,” strengthening families and communities, fixing “our dysfunctional political system and get[ting] unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment,” and protect[ing] our country from the threats that we see, and the ones that are on the horizon.”
According to a transcript made available to reporters by a campaign aide, Clinton struck a pretty populist tone during her remarks at Kirkwood Community College, emphasizing her concern that the “deck is still stacked in favor of those already at the top.”
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty