Stoneage Ramblings

By John R. Stone

OK. I’ll admit it. My expectations of a person who would occupy the Presidency of the United States or Congress are pretty high.

And the process we use to select presidential candidates doesn’t always yield what I would like to see.

Years ago presidential candidates used to be selected in what they used to call “smoke filled rooms.” Party leaders would gather together and select the person who would be the party’s nominee.

Tired of smoke filled rooms without a chance for input, the public demanded and got open primaries. Anybody who wanted to run as a Republican or Democrat or under some other party’s banner could do so. The voters would decide.

Sometimes that meant a candidate might not be a person whom party leaders would like as the best candidate from their viewpoint.

There is a theory that over the years this had led to people running for office with more extreme positions, be they to the right or to the left. The candidates were running just for the party audience, not for broader general election support.

It is kind of the “shake ‘em up” theory, we’re going to make people listen to our grievances by sending this person to Congress or the Presidency.

The problem is that these people aren’t able to grow large coalitions that can actually accomplish much. The flame throwing rhetoric turns off enough people who may not want to be associated with an extreme action or position.

Depending upon the year, about 30-40 percent of people identify themselves as Democrats, 30 to 40 percent identify as Republicans with the balance identifying as independents or third party voters. Those numbers can swing a little but it does show you that neither major party has control, both need to attract independents or other party voters to get candidates elected.

That control issue is being tested. If you can’t attract voters you can make it hard for people who might not vote for you to vote for anyone else. Or you can gerrymander a district to limit the impact of a group of people.

I wonder if what we really need to do is encourage really good candidates to seek political office. I’m thinking of leaders with good experience in a field, who can be respected by a wide variety of people, and who either have experience in the legislative process or are quick studies.

Where we are now is that Republicans and Democrats have taken positions from which they feel they cannot budge. So what happens? Nothing. Meanwhile problems go undealt with, budgets don’t get made or lived with, and our nation’s finances resemble those of a drug addict selling his or her soul for the next fix.

Democrats and Republicans point fingers at each other but consider this; since 2000 there have been 12 years of Republican presidents and soon to be 12 years of Democratic presidents and we have added about 25 trillion dollars to the national debt in that period of time. It isn’t just one party that has done this, it’s both because they choose to play partisan politics over running the nation, which is their job to do.

So we need leaders with a broader base than one political party. We need smart people capable of building bridges rather than walls. We need to send people to Washington who are not flamethrowers who insult and demean others but those who can make an effort to see where they can agree with others.

And the good of the nation must always be everyone’s first priority, not the next election or opportunity for fundraising. Leaders need to know enough to explain to us there are not easy answers to everything and why a certain policy or position is best for the nation as a whole. And we need to listen and learn.

Yes, we need more from our leaders. It’s long past time when we should demand it. We need to start electing better people. We need higher expectations!