As November approaches, the upcoming presidential election continues to gain media coverage. Both Democratic and Republican candidates are vying for attention and votes as caucus season begins. However, former Democratic New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced he has contemplated a presidential run.

Bloomberg became involved in politics in the early 2000s with his election as mayor of New York City. Bloomberg, who was mayor of NYC for two terms, succeeded in pushing through state legislation to run for a controversial third term as mayor in 2008. His previous career on Wall Street allowed him to finance all of his mayoral campaigns, including spending almost $90 million on this third.

Now 73, Bloomberg has come into the 2016 presidential race as a possible Independent candidate. This idea of running for president is not new to Bloomberg; he previously considered running, but decided success was too unlikely. However, the popularity of Donald Trump and the contest between Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders has led Bloomberg and his aids to draw a potential plan. Bloomberg officially changed his political status to Independent in 2007, but has held liberal values, such as supporting gun control and abortion rights.

Becoming part of the presidential race this late is Bloomberg’s main concern. He sponsored a poll to gauge how well a third-party candidate would do against Clinton and Trump, a tactic he used when deciding whether to run against Barack Obama in 2008. His aids have designed a campaign consisting of concentrated television advertisements and detailed policy speeches that they believe would work best for the relatively unknown candidate.

Another difficult factor for Bloomberg is the fact that no Independent presidential candidate has ever won the White House. However, he has received an endorsement. Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has officially come out in support of Bloomberg.

“[Bloomberg] understands governing. He understands leadership. He understands people. He’s got the qualities that are required for the presidency, starting with character,” Hagel said in a phone interview with the New York Times.

There are some who support Bloomberg running as a way to increase the chances of a Republican winning the White House. Senator Rand Paul, a former presidential contender, stated to reporters that a potential Bloomberg bid could split the Democratic vote. The former mayor of NYC has until the first week of March to decide whether or not this presidential election would be favorable for an Independent candidate.

If you take a quick glance at the polls, you may fail to notice his name. If, by chance, you make your way through the crowded GOP field and find yourself lurking at the bottom of the candidate pool, you’ll find him: John Kasich.

Kasich’s candidacy has yet to spark the same curiosity as Trump or Carson’s, but his involvement has caught my attention.

Kasich is a less polarized alternative to the rest of the GOP candidates and has demonstrated a willingness to establish common ground between parties and mediate tough but necessary conversations.

Previously, he served as the U.S. House Budget Committee chairman and worked with Democratic representative Timothy Penny to produce a federal budget. In 1997, Kasich mediated conversations between Clinton and house republicans to establish a balanced budget. In Ohio, he led a similar effort and turned an $8 billion shortage into a $2 billion surplus.

Kasich has been adamant about budget cuts. In previous conversations, his suggestions to focus budget cuts on tax subsidies for farmers and corporate tax breaks were not taken well. But, his mediation and willingness to work across party lines is a quality of Kasich’s that I admire.

In each election, I attempt to vote based on issues, but I generally lean more left because of my focus on addressing income inequality. Kasich addresses income inequality within the framework of a small government.

In 2012 when the US Supreme Court made Medicaid expansion optional for States, Kasich launched a dramatic effort to expand Medicaid in Ohio. He was in a meeting with a legislator, during the expansion of Medicaid under The Affordable Care Act, he said:

“Now, when you die and get to the meeting with St. Peter, he’s probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small. But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. You better have a good answer.”

While his expansion of Medicaid was done from a religious perspective, his reasoning and motives were well publicized. Kasich is consistent.

When it looked as if the legislature would not approve the expansion, Kasich announced he would bypass the legislature and deferred to Ohio’s Controlling Board. They passed the expansion.

His commitment to passing the expansion, a move that was not supported by the Republican Party, led Kasich to receive a lot of backlash from members of his own party.

To counter their objections, Kasich referenced conservative figurehead, Ronald Reagan.

“Reagan was fiscally responsible, but he was also pragmatic and compassionate. When we consider what Reagan would do, let’s also remember what he did do – expanded Medicaid,” he said.

Kasich is an advocate for budget cuts but has a sense of moral obligation to ensure the poor are well taken care of. He asks that supporters of small government come up with a way to help the poor and has challenged his party with a task that is not inherently simple. But, his focus on the problem of income inequality in America exemplifies the generosity of Christian values many other Republican candidates claim to hold.

While he may be further behind in the polls, Kasich recognizes what he considers to be the impracticalities of tax plans and budget cuts of those leading the GOP.

“You can’t do it with empty promises. You know, these plans would put us trillions of dollars in debt,” Kasich said.

“We cannot elect somebody that doesn’t know how to do the job,” he said in the third GOP debate.

There are fewer than 100 days until the first primary in Iowa, and Kasich has some serious ground to pick up in order to not be lost among the myriad of candidates. However, as long as the American people recognize that Kasich is an experienced politician with a feasible plan, there is still a fighting chance.

I do not want to start this piece and act like this isn’t personal to me. Hillary Clinton is someone I have looked up to for years and “shattering the glass ceiling” has always been apart of her campaign, as well as my lifestyle. Placing her in the role of “just a First Lady” is completely pigeon-holing one of the best politicians in America today.

To call Hillary Clinton a seasoned professional would be an understatement. She was named one of the 100 most powerful lawyers in America by the National Law Journal in 1988 and 1991, spent eight years as First Lady of the United States, served as a US senator for New York and served as US Secretary of State.  Because of her experience as a United States senator and a cabinet secretary, she has becoming proficient in compromising and to have an open political dialogue. With Hillary, we know what we are getting: experience.

Despite having been in the realm of politics for many years, by no means is Hillary Clinton disconnected from the middle class as some dissenters like to say. In voting for a president, the economic means of the candidate does not carry much weight. What matters is if he or she has the moral compass to understand that economic mobility is prohibited by classism, the desire to help others advance from their current station in life and the legislative plan to assist the industries that keep America working.

One of Hillary’s greatest advantages is her foreign policy experience. As Secretary of State, Clinton visited 112 countries and attended 306 diplomatic meetings, making her the most widely traveled Secretary of State in history. She is far more familiar than any of her Democratic or Republican challengers with world leaders and their political agendas. Furthermore, Clinton views human rights to be critical for US security interests, which is a more evolved perspective that views our national security as more than simply a military power.

Many of Clinton’s dissenters claim that her “flip-flopping” on certain issues makes her unpredicatable and hard to trust. However, Clinton addresses her changes in opinion as merely her adjusting her views based on the information she receives.

“I am not someone who stakes out a position and holds it regardless of the evidence or regardless of the way that I perceive what’s happening in the world around me,” Clinton said in an interview with Meet the Press.

I believe a president that is able to adjust her policy and stance based on new information coming in, rather than staying steadfast in her ways, will promote a much-needed compromise in American politics.

With the first debates for the Democratic party approaching, I am eagerly waiting for the dialogue between Hillary Clinton and candidate Bernie Sanders, senator from Vermont. Both have been tip-toeing around one another for throughout their campaigns, a very different strategy from the Republican party. I think they are more similar than most individuals would like to admit, however Hillary Clinton has quite a ways to go if she wishes to align herself closer to Sander’s progressive mantra.

Hillary Clinton should pay attention to Bernie Sanders. After all, he has the advantage of placing himself outside of the political elite. Because of Bernie’s numbers, there is no doubt in my mind Hillary will curve even more to the left if given the Democratic nomination. After all, like I said earlier, Hillary has the mindset to evolve her policies into what she believes will best enhance life for the average American.

Hillary Clinton is the most appropriate candidate for the Democratic party. With her experience, name recognition and undoubted political expertise, she would be able to lead the executive branch with finesse.
That darn bumper sticker in the parking lot of a restaurant has compelled me to pay close attention to Hillary Clinton throughout my life, and I couldn’t think of a more professional, intelligent candidate to keep an eye on.