What's at Stake

What's at Stake

Colby political anaylysts provide perspective on the 2004 presidential election, ranging from foreign policy to the economy to the environment

#analysts#right#40%#When American voters go to the polls in November, they will be faced with some choices. Bush or Kerry - or Nader? Republican or Democrat? Unilateral foreign policy or more traditional diplomacy? Iraq war - yes or no? A more conservative Supreme Court or a more liberal one? The party that pushed through a Medicare package or the party that is calling for deficit reduction?

To gain a better understanding of the issues of this election, Colby visited selected faculty members and alumni and asked one simple and open-ended question: "What is at stake in this elections?"

Then we sat back and listened, as political scientists, Washington analysts, economists and historians offered observations about the election and the direction it might take the country and the world. Every interview raised intriguing questions and perceptive answers.

If foreign intervention a liberal tendency or a conservative one? How are social issues driving this election? If the next president appoints three new Supreme Court justices, will it really change life as we know it? Are there history lessons that must be relearned with each generation?

Is this election about John Kerry or is it actually about Hillary Rodham Clinton? Will issues like poverty and the environment even be considered? If Bush is reelected, what to do in Iraq? Of Kerry is elected, how will he answer the same question? Who would have thought a half-trillion dollar deficit could be a non-issue?

What follows is a Colby faculty/alumni take on the election, unrehearsed, spoken in their own words. Read on to gain a better understanding of what one faculty member summed up as "a very instructive election."
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | Next Page »