“You don’t have the stamina to be President.”

“You can put half of his supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables.”

A debate in a Kindergarten classroom might yield a similar level of content.

As voters head to the polls, they often reflect on the past years of campaigning and debating among presidential candidates. This election cycle, reflection frequently causes more frustration and resignation than hope or excitement. As people cast their votes, they should consider more than just words and personalities and think about the future of the party they represent and the nation as a whole.

Over the course of both candidates’ campaigns, many people have expressed concerns about the personalities and behavior of the candidates. Though character can and should determine leadership potential, campaigns seek to reveal the worst in every other participant. If people base their opinions of those in question entirely on information they have learned over the course of short campaigns, they may miss important details. Voters should pay attention to leadership positions, actions and decisions candidates have made over the course of their entire careers. Actions really do speak louder than words.

Many people argue for or against the current candidates based on personality and campaigning, but few think forward as far as what each candidate will do in office. In this particular election cycle, the winning candidate will have authority over decisions such as Supreme Court appointments. Whoever takes the reins in January 2017 will largely select who will replace the current empty seats, with congressional approval. Whether the court sways one direction or the other affects every aspect of government. Issues which up to this point have been ignored will quickly gain national attention, or worse, slip through the fingers of representative democracy unnoticed through the duplicity of a court slanted at best and entirely corrupt at worst.

Some of the current candidates demonstrate a more polished political front, saying what the masses would like to hear, while others tend to take a more abrupt approach. Both means of communication have consequences, both good and bad. Voters must take more into consideration than simply who said what and how they said it. As with any other national election, the future of the country hinges on this decision, and it must come down to who can better lead this nation in the coming years.

The Eagle’s Tale editorial staff has chosen not to endorse either candidate in this election. As a staff, we want to encourage citizens to think before they vote and ignore slanted media coverage and cultural peer pressure in favor of a rational, forward-thinking decision as to who should take the reins in 2017.