While it might appear to make no difference if a candidate is Republican or Democrat, I’d say a freshly galvanized non-voter would be hard pressed to suggest that any of the Y2K presidential hopefuls could have performed with more mischievous malevolence than George W. Bush. Disengaged citizens used to be ambivalent about their lack of options. Now we have precedent for thinking very hard about the lesser of evils. 
We don’t want just the better of the worst, we have to be sure to pick the lesser EVIL.
Will 2008 be a veritable toss-up between shills? We need to know for Decision 2008 if there lurks another Alfred E. Neuman Nero in the bunch.
Remember this little boy? His occult powers and prepubescent morality made him the demonic despot of a little American farming town in an early Twilight Zone episode. He could read people’s minds and had the power to punish them at will. Though he might easily have been deposed by a collective effort, no one dared lay a finger. Frustrated individual insurgents were summarily disappeared to the corn fields.
With FISA surveillance and the Patriot Act, could this be George W.?
But even if we could discern the truly evil, the amorality which comes with profound lack of profundity, do we really have the power to make our choice heard?
We’re told the primaries determine the presidential winner. I heard an NPR reporter covering the circus interject with “here’s a fact:” and proceed to declare that no one below the second place in such and such caucus has ever gone on to win the nomination etc, etc. As if a statistical likelihood could yield an absolute. Then there’s the Iowa Caucus Curse or some such, to throw witchcraft into the pot for those blasphemers who think statistics can lie. I hear what they media pundits are really saying, when they “predict” with the caucus results, and it is true. The media have always determined who is going to win. Whether it’s in the primaries or in the final election. Whoever they choose wins. The distance between is a horse race.
This issue of whether to vote for what is often called the lesser of 2 evils is an entirely wrong way to look at and evaluate the American elections. When we vote we are not voting merely for an individual or not, but we are voting for a political party. We are voting for a team.
It might then be said that the Democrats are a better team than the Republicans? And YES, to many this seems self evident. The lesser of 2 evils then becomes reduced down to thinking that the team of Democrats is better than the team of Republicans. But does the evidence really back that up?
What are you really for? Are you for the best team to manage the corporate world? Are you really supportive of corporate America running the entire country unopposed? Because they offer you up 2 teams. Do you really want to decide on which is th best team to drive corporate America? Is Dennis Kucinich, for one example, really best for America, the corporate state? Ask yourself that question, because Kucinich has offered himself as the best candidate for manager of one corporate team, the Democratic Party.
How about Dennis Kuchinich and Ron Paul as an Independent team? That would really shake up the military elite – or do we need the military to ensure a strong world economy?