This is an election year and everybody wants to tell you how to vote. Me too. Well, I won’t tell you specific candidates to vote for (or against), but I want to present some Important Things to Consider in choosing your leaders.
First, there is the matter of party affiliation. If you are 100 percent dyed-in-the-wool Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal, you can stop reading now. Your mind is made up. All that remains is casting your ballot. No further thought is required. But maybe you think that some electoral issues are worth examining. If so, read on.
There are so many factors to consider in choosing who to support. Some are important, some are trivial; some personal, some general; some positive, some negative. In a sense, all the possible factors are important because they influence how someone votes.
We like to think that The Issues are the all-important drivers of how we vote. And they are, sort of. More than some influences, the so-called “hot button” issues are the ones that divide us and motivate us: abortion, immigration, religion, sexuality, patriotism, and race (I would like to think that race has finally become a non-issue, but I fear it hasn’t). If you feel intensely enough about any one of these, it may overshadow any other consideration. And these issues are the ones that promote the finest fence-straddling from candidates. Any position they take will certainly offend someone.
Political consultant James Carville propelled Bill Clinton into the presidency by proclaiming to his campaign workers, “It’s the economy, stupid” as the only viable issue. It was, and it still is. We all want a prosperous economy for America. But even more, we want more money for ourselves. If a candidate favors my profession, my age group, my locality, my investments, then he or she has my immediate support. It’s my income, stupid. Selfish? Sure, but taking care of my own situation and my family is paramount. Let the others fight for their piece of the pie. And they will. Right? Unfortunately, yes.
Background and experience can be crucial. Prior military service is helpful, especially if you are Supreme Allied Commander like Eisenhower, and won a world war. Occasionally, bone spurs will be an acceptable substitute. Being born in a log cabin no longer works since no one now alive was. Experience in government usually helps but is not essential. Having been a movie actor or peanut farmer obviously works too.
How about ethics and morality? These used to be biggies. Alas, not anymore. Gary Hart’s presidential candidacy was derailed in 1987 when someone produced and published a photograph of him with a not-his-wife woman sitting on his lap. There were already rumors of his infidelity flying around. Photographic evidence proved fatal to his run for office. Other presidents (FDR, Eisenhower, Clinton) were involved in adulterous affairs but their improprieties were mostly ignored. Accepting gifts while in office was considered a moral failing if not a criminal one. Fast forward to 2026: adultery (even sexual assault) is ok, conviction of a felony is ok, and shady business deals are expected and approved. Everything is forgivable if it’s our man committing them.
We want our candidates to be physically attractive with a friendly personality, but history shows this isn’t a requirement. Lincoln was considered ugly, Taft was too fat, “Silent Cal” Coolidge was socially inept. They won and prospered. Conversely. Eisenhower’s famous broad smile, Kennedy’s good looks, and George W. Bush’s folksy friendliness (“You would enjoy having a beer with him in your backyard”) did not render them immune from attacks. Attractiveness is certainly an asset, not a necessity.
Now you have a checklist for evaluating candidates. There are other lesser factors to consider as well: endorsements from newspapers and other politicians; patriotic evidence (that would be the required American flag lapel pin); and political strength (Is he a third-party candidate with absolutely no chance of winning, and is therefore rendering your vote less relevant). Or the ultimate, “I know he’s no good, but the other guy is worse”.
Finally, good preparation for voting is threefold: study the past, evaluate the present, and predict the future. The past is easy – history books and Google will tell you everything you need to know and interpret it for you. The present is tiresome. You will be inundated with propaganda from every campaign, most of it severely biased. Wade through it. Predicting the future is difficult or, more likely, impossible. Still, that’s what voting is: believing that current decisions will produce the expected and desired results. Surprises, good and bad, are inevitable. When the chips are down, the cows come home, the bottom of the barrel is scraped, the results are in, and clichés are finished, repentance may be in order. Good luck.