Candidate Rundown

Here is my take on the Presidential Candidates as of today:

Mitt Romney

In a movie, Groucho Marx once said, “Are you going to believe me, or your own eyes?” That’s funny – except when it is the theme of a presidential candidate. The more you hear Mitt Romney, the more you are presented with that choice. Yes he has changed is mind on some important beliefs. Yes he says now that he will be the best conservative candidate with the highest ethical and moral standards. Yes I want to believe him. But what he has done (or not done) in the past show up to be problematic. Perhaps if he were to be faced off with Hillary Clinton, I would vote for Mitt. Why? They both need you to consider Groucho’s question.

Mike Huckabee

Where Mitt hates for people to ask him questions about his religious beliefs, Mike Huckabee loves it. Typically the questions come from people every good Baptist preacher wants to evangelize anyway. In a debate setting, when someone fires up one of those questions to the candidates, where the other candidates stumble over their words, or where they end up sounding sanctimonious, Huckabee clearly nails the moment. He is very good. Yet when it comes to world politics, his joke about sleeping in a Holiday Inn Express last night rings all too true. In this world, there is no time to sit down in the oval office and ask yourself the question about how you think you should handle world politics.

Fred Thompson

No matter who wins the nomination, the first thing he should do is name Fred Thompson as his running mate. Then we could continue his role as Arthur Branch in Law and Order, the TV show. Each candidate has some glaring weaknesses and needs somewhere to go to clear the fog. Walk into Fred’s office, sit down and have him lean back in his chair and explain the choices. Or, in a tough political situation, send him out to the press to explain things in such simple terms that people wonder why they didn’t think of it. From a technical sense, Dick Cheney was probably the best VP a President ever had. If he had a shortcoming, it was simply image. Fred’s appeal IS image. And he is politically savvy, too.

Rudi Gullianni

Rudi Gullianni to me is the anti – Hillary candidate. If she is the Dem’s candidate then Rudi should run against her. He has some past baggage, alright. But she has a whole baggage compartment. So, the reasonable choice there would be for baggage to cease to become an issue for Rudi. Apparently, the militant Palestinians would hate to see Rudi become President. They could stomach anyone else, but Rudi. That is a huge plus for him in my book.

John McCain

John McCain might be the best choice. Conservatives love his military stand. His armor against Democrats in this area is superb. He could even silence John Murtha and John Kerry. The problem that traditional Republicans have is his apparent softness on immigration. However, if he was a bridge-builder on that issue, it might be what saves the Republican Party. The Republican Party needs to address how it will entice Hispanics into it over the next several decades. Its chances of winning future national elections depend on that issue more than any other.

Hillary Clinton

I wrote a post on the question of who you would like to see answer the “Red Phone” in a time of international crisis. Another way to view that question is who would our adversaries hate to see answer the Red Phone? You can believe that our new President is going to be challenged. Other leaders, both allies and adversaries will need to feel out how our new President will handle crises. The scariest to me? Hillary Clinton. Why? No rudder. I think she should have a standard disclaimer. “Whatever she says today, is subject to change tomorrow.” Her “expertise” in politics is the ability to shamelessly contradict herself. She brings to mind another Groucho Marx quote: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others."

Barak Obama

If you are worn out by tradition and want to redefine America, then Barak Obama is your man. He will bring change to America. Where we have debated about whether the words “under God” should be in the Pledge of Allegiance, Barak Obama personally omits every word from “I” to “all”. I believe that if you are mad at America because it hasn’t done enough for you, then Barak is your man. I predict that if he becomes President he will be severely tested on the international front. No one would have gone from being in a State Legislature to being President of the United States is such record time. He represents the dissatisfied people of the country in my opinion. And there are unfortunately many people who are dissatisfied.

John Edwards

John Edwards is a medical malpractice trial lawyer. He is a good one. His training and experience is that through the right amount of logic, emotion, reasoning (his reasoning), and drama he can convince people how they are getting the short end of the stick. This ability is always dependant upon the belief that there is a great check-writer that can pay treble damages. Thus, he is most effective when he is against someone. What would happen if he became that “someone”. Once you become the ruler, it is hard to keep up the fight against the ruler. But my biggest concern about Edwards is his training. I saw it when he was Kerry’s running mate in ’04. He has been trained to say ANYTHING if it will win over the jury or further his cause. He is not believable to me. He cares more about the outcome than the path it takes to get there.

I believe these elections are very important. I believe that the most recent assassination in Pakistan is a grim but important reminder that the most important consideration is our President's outlook of our relationship with the rest of the world.