You know what turns me off to candidates...

[skids]

...is when they treat the constituency like pawns, psychologically manipulating them for their votes.

...is when they run focus groups not to find out what people think about the country, but rather where their hot buttons and raw nerves are.

...is when they sidestep the issues in order to throw a few pieces of red meat or hit the perfect sound bite.

And folks, you aren't helping.

If you want to influence my vote, post stuff about who your candidate would like to appoint to what agency.

A candidate's "fantasy football team" (but not too fantasy -- actual serious suggestions for people they would like to see on their resume short lists) is the only question that tells me both how serious they are about the issues, and their ability to judge character.

[Uben]

1. At this point.....

I don't think they have released that information. Yo will have to make your choice based on their stands on the issues.

[Dogmudgeon]

2. I half agree

My only "quibble" is that the candidates are not the ones doing most of the manipulating -- it has clearly been the press corps.

The press has a lot of motivation to keep intrapartisan conflict alive. It makes people interested in the news, and they get more ad revenue. It wouldn't matter if Gandhi was running against the Dalai Lama, they would still crank up the stink.

Most of the real mud is coming from "low-level surrogates," which is what WE are. If Hillary and/or Barack are acting churlish, it means that, sadly, they have drunk deep of the Kool-Aid themselves. They're only human, which is usually a surprise when you fully realize it.

--p!