It's been about ten weeks since my previous entry on the subject of our next President, during which time there have been countless speeches, lots of debates, and honestly it makes my head hurt.

So, some musings:

1) It would be nice if candidates were honest. If they said what they thought, rather than what they think their audience of the moment wants to hear, it would save a lot of time. I have read that Mr. Obama has on several occasions not pandered to his audience, for which I give him some credit. Of course what most of them are thinking, if spoken aloud, might offend so many voters that they would immediately cease to be candidates.

Hmm, not necessarily a bad thing!

2) In spite of endless blathering by pundits, the fact is that there is no way to know how well any of the current candidates would do as President. No one—I repeat—no one can predict the future. We guess, we assume, we hope, but no one can predict what will happen next week, month, or year. So we can talk until we're breathless, but in the end we are going to guess and hope.

3) My own very personal opinion is that anyone who runs for President is probably crazy, or at the very least has an ego the size of Jupiter. This is not reassuring to me. It is quite possible that if the next President were chosen by random lottery from adult citizens with no arrest record and at least a high school diploma, we might do as well—while saving a lot of time and money—as we will with the current system of choosing. We might even get someone with good manners, common sense, and some real work experience. Imagine a President who had worked for a living, paid taxes, didn't have investment income, maybe didn't have health insurance. Could bring a refreshing dose of real world vision to the Beltway.

Perhaps for the next few debates, the moderators could be English teachers or other professionals who could, on the spot, pin down the speakers. "[Candidates Name], you didn't answer the question. Please do not change the subject/make stupid jokes/recite memorized drivel/insult our intelligence. Do you think it is okay for fifty million Americans to go without health insurance? And if you do not think this is acceptable, please explain, in detail, what you would do about it. You have ten minutes to outline your ideas and we will be taking notes. If you do think it is okay for so many citizens to go without health insurance, please explain why you feel it is necessary that you have such insurance when they do not."

Then again, in the age of sound bites, do we voters really want to listen carefully to answers which take longer than one minute? Lincoln and Douglas, spinning in their graves...

Is it my imagination, or does experience not count for much any more when people decide to run for President? Or when voters decide who to support?

I have been following the too-early campaigns for Presidential nomination, and watching the list of candidates or soon-to-be candidates grow ever longer, but in looking at their bios, I am struck by how little executive and governmental experience many of them have. Or maybe I'm not seeing something.

The Washington Post has info on all the candidates (even some who are still thinking about it). I spent some time yesterday reviewing all the candidates' governmental experience, and it looks to me like Bill Richardson—whose campaign seems to get zero national media attention—is, on paper at least, far more qualified to be running for President than any of the others. I don't know much about him, but compare Richardson:

* Governor of New Mexico, 2003-present
* U.S. Secretary of Energy, 1998-2001
* U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 1997-1998
* Representative, United States House of Representatives, 1983-1997

to Rudy Guliani:

* Mayor, New York City, 1994-2001
* United States Attorney, 1981-1989

Or Mitt Romney:

* Governor of Massachusetts, 2003-2007
* Chairman, Republican Governors Association

Or Hilary Clinton:

* Senator, United States Senate, 2001-present
* First Lady of the United States, 1993-2001
* First Lady of Arkansas, 1979-1981, 1983-1993
* House Judiciary Committee, 1974

Or Barack Obama:

* Senator, United States Senate, 2005-present
* Senator, Illinois State Senate, 1997-2004

If you have time, look at all the others also and you'll see what I mean.

I am very undecided at this point, and by the time we Mainers get to vote, it may be all over as far as who the Presidential candidates will be, but in view of the monumental problems that the next President will be facing, I think I'd prefer someone who actually has experience under his or her belt. And Richardson looks like the most experienced candidate in either party.

If you'd like to comment, send me an email and put Politics in the subject line so I can filter it into a separate folder. Also let me know if it's okay to quote you, assuming I have time. I'm curious to know what others think about this.