Change for the Better

The “it word” in the 2008 election campaigns is “change.” Each candidate knows the people press them for it, the talking heads thrash out their plans to make it, and their opponents call each other out on who’s best fit to facilitate it. In the Democratic race, specifically, the front-runners lash their tongues and swing their loaded rhetoric at one another about it.  Obama’s created a climate of change based on his intelligence, ideals and moral code, trumping his relative political naiveté.  Clinton, on the other hand, bases her argument on the cold facts, touting the changes she’s already made as proof that she could make further advancements.            After spending my break in my home city of Philadelphia, I’ve seen how combining both of the two individual features of Obama and Clinton—real experience and inspiring ideals—into one single politician leads to sweeping change. Stepping into the job at a time when murder rates and crime reign over the city, new mayor Michael Nutter plans to take the power back. He now plans to rule.He uses his years of political experience to guide his distinctive set of beliefs rarely seen in Philadelphia politics. He balanced the pendulum of political know-how versus a personal, political value system in appointing some cabinet members who held positions for years, and others new to the job. On his first day at work, Mayor Nutter started off with a prayer service attended by representatives from nearly 20 different faiths, stating that “there may be different views and different opinions [but]…you can bring people together.” The day ended with citizens invited to City Hall to shake his hand and join in a reception.

All of these events were new to the city, and all of these changes came about as a result of Nutter’s work within city politics and his visionary ideals. From this coupling, a sense of hope has emerged.          Perhaps our country would better from a Nutter-esq candidate—one that blended Clinton’s experience with Obama’s beliefs. Nutter’s successful changes create a new expectation for a leader. Change is not merely a “hot” cause manufactured by Washington; it’s a reality for Philadelphia, and with the right candidate and the right combination of political familiarity and a moral center, it could be a reality for the United States too.