You better not vote if ...

You form all your impressions of the candidates from their TV ads

You have no idea where each candidate stands on the key issues they will vote on as your representative

You're voting against someone instead of for someone

Your opinions on issues were formed by watching CNN or CBS, or what people you know say.

You haven't bothered to at least read the newspaper profiles on the candidates for local offices.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's not that difficult, you know. The internet is a very fast resource to find out who's running for what, their qualifications (or lack thereof), their positions on important issues, and what they've promised to do if you elect them.

It's funny - I saw some political ads up in Northern Indiana this week, then a couple over the weekend after I got home. I can't see how anybody could take these ads seriously.

For example, up north there was an ad against congressman Chocola. I don't really know anything about the guy, but the ad was kind of funny. The basic message from the ad was, "Don't vote for Chocola, who's a millionaire and is cozy with George W. Bush". It made me curious about how much his opponent is worth.

Even funnier was when I got home and saw virtually the same ad here against Sodrel. "Don't vote for Sodrel because he's a millionaire and is cozy with George W. Bush". I guess they just produced the same ad across the country and substituted the candidate name for each campaign.

But then I saw a couple of Sodrel's ads. One was a pleasant surprise, showing Sodrel with some of the reasons he should be re-elected. That's the kind of ad I wish every candidate would run.

But then I saw an ad against Sodrel's opponent, Baron Hill. It accused him of "cashing in" on his position as a former congressman by taking a job with a Washington lobbying firm. Yawn. I can't imagine that ad would influence anyone's vote one way or the other.

Why can't both candidates just do what Sodrel did with his positive ad? Better yet, why not just show the voters where each of them stands? Wouldn't the best approach be to just show us the facts and let us decide? Very simply, all we really need to know is:

Abortion: Hill Pro-Abortion, Sodrel Pro-Life
Iraq: Hill Pro-Withdrawal, Sodrel Pro-Win first
Taxes: Hill Pro-Repeal Bush's Tax Cuts, Sodrel Pro-Keep Bush Tax Cuts
Healthcare: Hill Pro-Socialized Medicine, Sodrel Pro-Private System

You get the idea.

Apparently, both sides seem to be afraid to put their positions out there. By attempting to trash the other, they hope to gain a protest vote, or at least disgust voters from the other side into staying home.

If I were to run for office, I'd want to run that way. Here's my position on the issues, and here's how my position is different from that of my opponent. Vote for me if you agree with me; vote for my opponent if you agree with him (her).

I think we would end up with a much better government if that happened.