Picking a candidate

Every so often I like to rethink my choices on candidates. It just seems to be a solid idea to ask yourself the questions again and see if the answers are the same. Things change with time. Hopefully as time passes you learn new things. A disclaimer I am a Rudy guy.

The top tier criteria for me

1. Expected effectiveness in office vs Alignment with personal views.

I.E. The get what I want stat

This is a combined stat. I wouldn't want to elect Hillary even though she could be inconceivably horrifyingly effective in office.

2. Checkmark Issues and Believability.

Once again little simple or straightforward. All the candidates will hit the big checkmark issues. The big question is how believable are they. There are candidates who are hitting all the checkbox issues but quite frankly aren't very believable. Its as if they found out what the checkboxes were and decided to make certain they hit them. Doesn't earn much in the way of points. Too many candidates seem to have a flurry of epiphanies come election time.

3. The candidate knows when to throw out the rulebook vs character.

When you put a man in office he will follow his own start. There are times when everything that has been said and everything that may be believed in has to be thrown out for the greater good. I think of Jefferson for this stat. A man deeply dedicated to keeping power out of Washington and limited government. When the Time came he waged war against the Barbary Pirates and Made the Louisiana purchase. Both, were things he would have been philosophically opposed to

Character is the thing that insures when a president throws out the rulebook they are doing the right thing. Clinton is the perfect counterexample to this. He repeatedly threw out the rulebook but consistently showed a lack of character in the actions. Lobbing missiles into Aspirin factories is not the act of character. Trying to conduct war solely from the air is not character.

4. Electability/Coattails

Electability is the most talked about and the least useful to me. Its just too volatile. Just look at this election on both sides every candidate has been considered electable and unelectable (with a few exception). So I like to ask as a qualifier if they do win, will they bring others with them. The expansion of the brand is important to me. Theres never a sure thing on the win (Well except when Mondale ran on raising everybody's taxes) so its beneficial to have a campaign that expands the support of concepts you are for. If you win it magnifies the effect. If you lose it doesn't turn it into a win but it does take some of the sting out.

Those are my four biggies. The rest are just things that can disqualify a candidate. Good health, Not using a Macintosh, good political skills are just the ante. If the candidates make a standard on them the points aren't considered if the candidates don't they aren't considered.

Hope you find the above useful. Writing it helped me think about my positions perhaps it can do the same for you.