There are three kinds of lies...

"This well-known saying is part of a phrase attributed to Benjamin Disraeli and popularized in the U.S. by Mark Twain: There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics" according to Wikipedia. Based on my recent experiences I'd like to amend this a little bit.

There are four kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, statistics, and political polls.

In the US, the political campaigns are in full swing as presidential hopefuls try to convince us citizens that they are the best ones to guide us as a nation into the future. With so many candidates to choose from, and the primaries and caucuses going on, the field is pretty crowded still. That will change in the coming months as the two primary parties select their delegates.

Trying to keep up with all of the candidates is still pretty tough. A number of them have something of interest. A number of them have things on their platform that really scare me. Sometimes, unfortunately it comes down to a lesser-of-two-(or more)-evils. Trying to see how the candidates stack up against the issues most important to me, I decided to take a few on-line polls. The polls asked my feelings on several issues and how strongly I felt about those issues. Pretty standard polling method. But what the polls revealed was a lot more than I was expecting. According to the polls, I'm a "Demo-Inde-Publican."

I'm a what?!

Each poll I answered had ideal candidate different. On one poll, I was very much entrenched in the Democratic camp. The next one had me on the exact other end of the spectrum. Still a third had me off the two-party system completely saying that one of the potential independent candidates most matched my presidential objectives. I knew that there would be some differences (OK, a lot of differences) between the candidates, but I didn't expect as much in polling. These weren't "Joe's Political Polls" questionnaires. These were national, and international, well-known sites offering to help me find the best person to lead this country.

True, the sites asked slightly different sets of questions, so that might skew the results a little based on my answers, but skew so much that I ended up at opposite ends of the spectrum? It made me think a little more about the motives of the pollsters. And in questioning their motives for the polls, I started to question their motives for the content of their other publication's content (newspapers, web sites, etc).

I admit that I am swayed by the public presentation of the candidates. That's the first step in rehabilitation. I've done some research, and I know that if I don't participate I can't complain after the fact if things don't turn out as I would like. That won't stop anyone from complaining no matter who wins, but... I can't stand to watch the debates live. I can't stand to see everyone in defense mode. I'd rather see them when they can present their views and plans without the "distraction" of everyone else. I've watched several candidates being interviewed alone. In each of those interviews, I caught something that made me think that the candidate really knew what they were talking about, or made it readily apparent that they were only saying what their handlers had told them to say -- that they really didn't know how to react when the interviewer went off script.

I can't say that I have a favorite candidate yet. I have several that scare me, but thankfully, they're dropping in the polls enough that my fear is subsiding. But, the election polls aren't closed yet -- not by a long shot -- so anything can happen.

Regardless of who wins in November, they will have an uphill battle in front of them. A battle to convince all of the people, not just those who didn't vote for them, that they really do know what needs to be done and can make it happen. They need to do it for all of US, and for the rest of the world that depends on us or despises, or just puts up with US.

I hope they can do it.