Yin and Yang for President

It seems that some of the presidential candidates are almost mirror opposites of each other, which gave me the idea of Yin and Yang.

Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, for example. They're both wild-eyed little guys who represent the outliers in their respective parties. Although Paul isn't really representative of the Republican party so much - he's actually a Libertarian. They would both agree on immediate abandonment of Iraq, although for very different reasons. Admittedly, Ron Paul has much greater support than Dennis Kucinich will ever get, but I still think they might be the best yin-yang combo in the field.

Next I'll pick Mike Huckabee and John Edwards. Two populists, and two sides of the same coin. They market themselves to the masses, telling people they're just like them. They seem to understand the worries and problems of ordinary people that the rest of the politicians seem to ignore. Personally, I've got to admit my amazement that Edwards' supporters have actually fallen for that, as Huckabee seems at least more believable.

Then I'm going with Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Both are camera-friendly, smooth operators. At the same time, both are a bit hard to pin down on where they really stand on certain issues. There is a contrast, in that Obama hasn't got much of a record that allows definition beyond his own stated ideas, while Romney has had to do a makeover to morph from a Massachusetts liberal governor into a conservative reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. Both are battling voter consternation over their religion, with Obama dogged by whispers that he might actually be a Muslim, and Romney by those who suggest he belongs to a fringe Christian cult.

In the biggest stretch on my yin-yang comparison, there's Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton. They're both popular New Yorkers, even though Hillary's actually a carpetbagger. They both have reputation as tough, take-no-prisoners politicians. One thing that can be said about the general campaign is that it could be the most fascinating matchup between the two candidates least likely to play nice or fair.

My last comparison is between Joe Biden and Fred Thompson. These are the two guys who have the best party credentials and are most focused on policy. They're the straightest talkers in the race on each side, even though they're diametrically opposed in their policy ideas. They both seem to get lots of respect from their traditional party bases, but can't get arrested in the press.

I just find it interesting. Picking the winners for this year's general election race feels a bit like picking the winners in the NFL playoffs. How about my comparisons between the NFL teams and the candidates?

New England Patriots = Hillary Clinton. Evil but widely picked to win it all.
Indianapolis Colts = Barack Obama. Looks good, but good enough to get to the Super Bowl?
San Diego Chargers = John McCain. Slow start, but surging.
Pittsburgh Steelers = Joe Biden. Struggling
Jacksonville Jaguars = Mike Huckabee. Surprising dark horse.
Tennessee Titans = Chris Dodd. No chance.
Dallas Cowboys = Rudy Giuliani. Super Bowl Favorite, but with challenges.
Green Bay Packers = Fred Thompson. Sentimental favorites.
Washington Redskins = John Edwards. Flashy but lacking winning talent.
Seattle Seahawks = Bill Richardson. Also-ran status.
New York Giants = Tom Tancredo. One-dimensional.
Tampa Bay Bucs = Ron Paul. Can't get to Super Bowl, but have devoted fans.