Old enough to know: Professional politicians

As the presidential race looms before us and college students wonder about the value of their vote, the GOP candidates continue to try to win voters to their side. In contemplating those who have dropped out, the question of what it takes to survive a presidential bid becomes paramount. In a world where politics consists of favors, back-scratching, fundraising, and mud-slinging, those who have the strength to stomach all of the ins and outs generally rise to the top. This, however, can change and fluctuate depending on how a candidate handles the pressures related to the race, causing him or her to either move towards success or crash and burn. A perfect example of this is Herman Cain.

For many months, Herman Cain, a business man with no previous political experience stood on his morals and quickly gained the admiration of countless followers, the national media, and of course, numerous enemies from the opposite side of the aisle. As allegations of sex scandals emerged it did not take long for his aspirations of becoming the next president to take a nose dive.

Though he continually denies the accusations, his candidacy has ended. Yet, other politicians have weathered such circumstances and gone on to not only survive, but thrive–Bill Clinton being one of the biggest examples. Interestingly enough, not only did many of the allegations against Clinton prove to be true, he also went on to be re-elected to a second term.

As a student of history that minored in politics, I find these subjects compelling. If anything, examples such as these bring to the forefront the differences between professional politicians and statesmen. The Encarta Dictionary defines a statesman as someone "who is widely respected for integrity and impartial concern for the public good." Conversely, it defines a politician as someone "whose main political motive is self-advancement and whose methods are often unscrupulous."

So how does someone with integrity and an impartial concern for the public good get elected to office when surrounded by people whose main political motive is self-advancement and whose methods are often unscrupulous? If you are not going to play the game their way, then it is essential to at least maintain a strong toughness that will not wither in the face of any allegations, regardless of the source. This was Cain's biggest mistake.

While Cain stood strong on his faith in God, his wizardry in the business world, and his ability to get the job done, his response to the allegations, which shrivel under serious investigation, appeared weak and uncertain. This may be the exact reason he did not survive as a viable candidate. If he had responded the same way that Clarence Thomas had when accused of sexual harassment by Anita Hill during his Supreme Court nomination, Cain may have survived. From the beginning, Thomas continued to strongly insist on his innocence. Clinton did the same and even after being found guilty later of numerous "indiscretions," to put it nicely, and of being impeached, he survived and thrived.

Who knows what the next eight months hold for the current candidates. When one throws their hat into the ring with aspirations of being one of the world's most powerful leaders, enemies and naysayers are bound to come out of the woodwork, as they should. After all, if one proves that he or she can survive in the bloodsucking, name-calling, reputation-ruining world of politics, then voters will know they can handle far more serious issues that surround foreign policy, homeland security, and economic crisis. Meanwhile, we can all hope that some of them turn out to be statesmen and not just politicians.