Mickey Mouse would be a better candidate than the current Democratic and Republican choices
I have recently blogged that none of the major party candidates can be taken seriously. None addresses the key issues that face the United States, namely, monetary inflation, excessive government, the war against terrorist jihad and the influence of economic special interests. As a result, I conclude, voters would be more rational to abstain than to vote for a candidate who has already demonstrated an unwillingness to discuss serious issues.
The candidates seem to have chosen to avoid serious discussion in order to avoid offending their economic patrons and revealing their true intentions. Many Americans, including many conservatives, would conclude that George Bush misled them as to his intentions in 2000. Given that the media has been unwilling to uncover meaningful evidence or information about candidates (as opposed to sexual predilictions or drug habits), the public has insufficient evidence to vote intelligently.
The problem with not voting, though, is that it sends a confused message. Is the individual not voting because he does not care? Or is he not voting because he actively aims to express dissatisfaction with the current candidates? The matter is further confused by fringe political parties such as Libertarians and Communists who are as ridiculous as the mainstream candidates but who give the impression of offering alternatives to the disaffected.
Instead, states should provide a column called "ABSTAIN". Voters should have the ability to actively express lack of interest in the dingbat political candidates. By actively choosing "ABSTAIN", the country will know the certain percentage of the public that cares enough to vote but is onto the inflationary/special interest brokerage game that the political/financial complex (along with its lackies in the press and academia) have been playing.