The Times has another article today on the closeness of this election. It is rather stunning that this race is so close, especially with Bush's popularity rating at an all time low of 44%. Why are people so unsure of Kerry? Is it his liberalism? Is his policy record and proposals?
I'm convinced that many people make a decision of who to vote for based on who would make the best dinner companion.
Sure people are uneasy about the war and question the intelligence of W., but he might be fun to go out with. He would make some cheesy jokes and goose the waitress. He would be quite happy at the local steak joint and wouldn't frown if you put ketchup on your prime rib. He would tell funny stories about getting drunk and driving around in his pickup truck.
A day with Kerry would take place at a restaurant with foreign words on the menu and far too many forks on the table. Kerry would go on and on about the ethanol tax and greenhouse gases. There would be some awkward pauses and everyone would just go home early.
I think Americans feel more comfortable voting for a world leader that licks their fingers after eating chicken wings and tosses some balls at a sports bar. Sure, they know that he might not be the sharpest tack in the box, but ultimately people want to vote for a peer. Clinton understood that as he chowed down on Big Macs and fries.
Does this bother me? In many ways, of course. Shouldn't we want the smartest guy in charge?
But I also think that voting for one's peer is a testament to our democratic culture. Americans don't want to worship their leaders or put them on a pedestal. Americans don't want IQ tests or breeding to determine who rises to the top. Americans don't want Mr. Perfect.
This principle of equality runs strongly in our culture. And though it might lead to disastrous ends, I admire it just the same.