Reevaluating Candidates' Campaign Approaches

I found an interesting editorial in the Dallas Morning News entitled “Editorial: Substance, Not Sound Bites, Needed in Race.” The basic argument of the author is that the presidential candidates should focus on more key issues during their campaigns rather than the ones they have been hitting on so far, and that they should not speak in generalities when doing so. Specifically, the author states restructuring of the financial system, problems with social welfare programs, foreign policy, and immigration reform as the subjects the candidates should be focusing on. The intended audience is obviously the voter demographic. The author’s credibility is questionable for several reasons. For one, he does not back up his “facts” with any credible sources. Additionally, the author claims that the candidates have only lightly touched on these issues in the past, and have not detailed them specifically, and yet he says nothing about what the candidates have actually said about them up to this point. Thus, the author never defines what exactly the delegates should change about their campaign strategies. This is a major flaw in the author’s logical approach, considering that this is the basic foundation of the entire argument. However, despite these flaws, I agree with the author’s overall message. After all, the editorial does do a good job in detailing the potentially disastrous ramification of ignoring these vital issues. The economy clearly seems to be in a state of decline, and the cost of maintaining social welfare programs will only add to the national debt. Our immigration system is broken, and looming threats such as Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan demand a reevaluation of foreign policy. For these reasons and more, I side with the author’s stance.