With the upcoming presidential election in our country, I began to
wonder what we really want from a presidential candidate. In the status quo, the
media tends to focus more on the past wrongdoings than the future proposals of
the candidate. Some say that this is wrong and some say that it isn’t. I
personally believe that the past wrongdoings of a candidate should not be a
major part in our decision making process during presidential elections. However,
I will attempt to argue otherwise.
Just because he or she had made mistakes in
the past doesn’t mean that the candidate is inevitably doomed for failure. But,
the mistakes show us a lot about who he or she was and this links to their credibility.
If his or her history is contradictory to the proposals at the time, whether
the policies they propose are appealing or not becomes irrelevant since we can’t
rely on them in the first place. Therein, the past wrongdoings should be an
important focus in presidential elections.
Good stuff. Very clear, and when I cut and paste it into Word I don't see ANY grammatical stuff or misspelled words. Thank you ! You divide the attention you give to both views in half. However, paragraph two still holds on to your original opinion with the first sentence. Seems like we don't need this. I would rather have a third mini-paragraph at the end that underlines your real opinion. All in all, best one I've read so far.
ReplyDelete