The right vice-presidential choice can help secure an election and build a lasting legacy, and the wrong one can tank even the most promising political career.
The recent terrorist attacks Orlando, Paris and Brussels, bombings in Turkey and reports of the Zika virus making its way around the world may have you wondering whether it’s wise to jet off for a vacation this summer.
The pollsters got it wrong, and many experts did too: Donald Trump, reality TV star and billionaire businessmen, has become the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2016 presidential election. This is a feat few predicted, in fact, it’s unlikely Trump himself would have believed it last year.
Every year is a good year to be politically informed, but 2016 is an especially choice one. I’ve had the pleasure of interviewing a variety of authors and political figures on Yahoo News Live, many of whom have published highly relevant books that add unique insight to the 2016 election.
In early April, 2016, the International Consortium of Journalists leaked a wealth of sensitive documents known as the Panama Papers. The leak consisted of 2.6 terabytes of data from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, and linked 140 world leaders from more than 50 companies to secret offshore accounts in 21 different tax havens.
Though Donald Trump has had enough charm to woo American voters — all the way to frontrunner status, no less — the spell of his bombast only extends so far. Politicians, pundits, and everyday joes and janes on both sides of the aisle have expressed shock at the power of Trump’s supporting mass. If the present political climate is indicative of issues we knew existed, no one predicted they would manifest quite in this way.
Since far before the shooting in San Bernardino and the terror attacks that precluded it, there have been questions and concerns over what ends justify the means of national security and legal investigations. What are we, as a people, willing to sacrifice for safety? What are we willing to forgive for it? Do corporations owe their allegiance to the government, over the people they serve?
On February 13, the Supreme Court lost its most animated dissenter, Justice Antonin Scalia. His family mourns the loss of a husband and father; the country, one of the most influential judges in history and an intellectual anchor of conservatism. Were the American constitution not “dead, dead, dead” by Scalia’s own interpretation, it too would likely mourn one of its greatest defenders.