Forest Gump was right when he said Presidential elections are like a box of chocolates. You really don’t know what you’ll get. Regardless, I’ve been an avid election follower since Carter’s nomination. I learned about pretty words, big lies, and plain folks sales tactics by adolescence. My political core was being formed even though I was unable to vote or voice an experienced opinion. And for the record, that core never understood all the fuss about Carter’s brown turtlenecks.

The actual election was a special treat. Mom let me stay up to watch. Those were the good old days when you knew who the President would be the same night the election was held. I would await the results like a child struggling to sleep on Christmas Eve. But like a carefully wrapped gift, the true contents of the nominees are often hard to discern by shaking the box. In the case of Presidential nominees, that old practice can be downright dangerous. “Johnny, put down that box. You’ll tear the wrapping; it’s the same paper that’s been used for the last eight years.” “Cindy, be careful dear, there’s only a little tape and hope holding that one together.”

In fact, when the entire nose pinching, eyes shut, lever pulling procedure is over, the four-year results often turn out quite differently than planned. Darn! Choose again. Maybe you’ll get the chocolate covered-cherry this time. Knowing whomever wins will only deliver 3% of what was promised dulls the pain. But in the spirit of wishful thinking, I’d like to make a few requests for the next election.

1. 1. Let’s call a lie a lie, and those who tell lies, liars. Obfuscation, disengenious, dissembling, and mischaracterization will all be outlawed words. When a candidate says something that can be proven factually untrue (superfluous enough?) over and over again, let’s call him or her a liar. Scream it from the rooftops of hurricane flooded homes.
2. 2. A clearer distinction should be made between journalists and professional pundits. When a journalist can’t mention a candidate’s name without drooling or becoming visibly excited, kindly remove them from the public conversation. I expect cheerleaders to carry pom poms and wear short skirts, not Armani suits. When the entertainment factor begins to outweigh the education factor, programs should not be couched as news.
3. 3. Finally, reconsider the entire debate debacle. Both of the major parties had over 20 debates. With all those debates and over a year of steady campaigning, there are still numerous people who claim not to know the most rudimentary history or positions of the candidates, one nominee in particular. There’s enough blame to go around here. It can take a few tries for a candidate to establish the political narrative he or she is consistently comfortable with. Also, voters can be incredibly apathetic and dismissive of candidates they don’t like. Nonetheless, if the purpose of debates is to inform the public, there’s obviously room for improvement.

I could continue but truthfully, this is a futile exercise. We’re in for a carnival from the day the news organizations pitch their tents until the last scrap of confetti is swept away. Media manipulate the candidates. Candidates manipulate the media. And we’re left to pick through the box of smashed chocolates, still hoping to find the one we really want.

Thanks to the Pink One for allowing me to guest blog.

Eric Blues