Four reasons why Beto shouldn't run for president, and four reasons he should

   This article written by Austin reporter Jeremy Wallace and published on the Houston Chronicle revolves around El Paso Democrat Beto O'Rourke and the possibility of him running for president, which he is set to announce by the end to this month. In his article, Wallace fives four pros and four cons on this decision. We can identify more valid reasons why he should run than why he shouldn't.

   The article begins by listing the reasons why he shouldn't. The first reason is that "his children routines might be affected by moving into the White House". In my opinion this is not really a valid reasons on why he shouldn't reuse it has nothing to do with his ability to do a good job. The second reason is that "Texas Democrats need him more", which might be true because there are not many Democrats working for Texas, but he can always keep on helping as he has been doing until now by running for president. The third reason listed is experience, because Wallace says that O'Rourke has only served 12 years in elective office between the city council in El Paso and 6 years in Congress, and while experience is a valid reasons to doubt the performance of someone in office, we currently have an elected president who has no previous political experience, and apparently people believed he could do a good job regardless of this situation. The last reason is "Primary War" which means he has to compete against other Democrats before being able to compete against Trump.

   On the other hand, Wallace gives some good reasons on why he should go for it. First of all he says that this might be the only moment for hum to do it and that by not doing so he might lose his opportunity. He gives the example of former President Barack Obama, who decided to take his shot even when he had only been two years in senate, or how Mario Cuomo decided not to run in 1992 and lost his opportunity because he was never considered a good candidate again. I believe that in politics and in life in general, when you have opportunities like these, if you let them pass you might never get them again. The second reason is the money, and how it was particularly easy for him to raise it when he was running for senate. The third is that he is still a young man, who can "give a dramatic contrast with President Trump", who is the age of the other Democrat contenders, and in my opinion this is a characteristic that he could use in his advantage. Lastly he says that "primary calendar could be ideal" for him.

   After reading this article, I believe that it is a well written and well informed. The author is a known Austin reporter so he has credibility. It gives good reasons on why it might be a good idea for him to run for president, but not so good ones on why he shouldn't. In mu opinion the const are not strong arguments, but this might be because there are not so many valid reasons on why he shouldn't do it.