This is my story: I have a hard time getting excited about most political elections. I'm a moderate who likes to vote for candidates based on individual qualities, not party affiliation. But for the upcoming presidential election, there are a lot of candidates to like. My reasons for liking said hopefuls range from shallow to ridiculous, and they have little to do with a person's ideas or platform.
Take Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). If he's good enough for Oprah, he's good enough for me. Then there's Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.). I'd really like to see a woman in the White House.
Or I could vote for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican who shares my faith, or Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who represents my home state. But if the election were tomorrow, I might pick Fred Thompson. The former U.S. senator (R-Tenn.) is probably better known for his role as District Attorney Arthur Branch on NBC's crime drama "Law & Order" than his political career. I've faithfully watched "L&O" for a decade, and Fred Thompson has played the best district attorney on record. His character is thoughtful and tough, a man who is willing to compromise and play the political game but who still wrestles with his conscience. I'd like to see a leader like Arthur Branch in the White House. I bet a lot of "Law & Order" junkies would.
Thompson's political Web site makes little mention of his role on the hit NBC show and instead plays up his real political experience. Which I think is a mistake. Voters have shown they are only too happy to elect former actors. And "Law & Order" has, like, a lot of fans. The founding fathers knew that some voters would be idiots (hence, the Electoral College), but I will still grudgingly study up on actual issues before I vote. That is, if I can find a break between "Law & Order" re-runs.
-- Elyssa Andrus
This article appeared in The Daily Herald on Oct. 3, 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment