It is 2016 and all eyes are on the election….I have been railing for months about the voters ignorance…..that they settle for slogans and applause lines over the real issues that face this country.

I have tried to help my readers understand that they need to vet their candidates before they support…….because they have some cute marketing scheme to convince you that they are the best for the job is neither smart or accurate.

To save myself some more grief I found an article in The Hill about this very subject…..I reproduce it here because it is sage advice and I do not want o depend on the clicking of a link…..

Nineteenth-century Prussian Gen. Helmuth von Moltke the Elder once opined “No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy.” Napoleon followed no strategy: “I have never had a plan of operations.” And pugilistic theorist Mike Tyson said “Everyone has a plan ’til they get punched in the mouth.” Their collective point is that theories of action only go so far; the most likely actions in crucial times must emanate from instinct.

These thoughts are relevant as voters consider choosing the next president.

What is it that a person’s — candidate’s — known instincts, demonstrate? Whatever they say in debates and proposals mean less than what they did in key crises through their decisions during times in power. War choices are first on my list of issues — and second and third as well. What nations do in wars defines what else is possible in domestic matters, the crucial reforms at home to make our lives better.

Technical issues of economics and appointments choices are important, no doubt; but they too are subject to the vicissitudes of the times, shifting from primaries to elections, and have far less consequences in real times.

The issues that President Obama debated with his opponents, Democratic and Republican, when he ran for office in 2008 were not the ones that greeted him in 2009 when he was sworn in as president. How he handled the daunting economic crisis he faced was not the agenda in his campaign. In hindsight, it is clear that his personal character and approaches to pressing issues were what guided his actions. Nothing he promised during his campaigns were hints of what he would do; but his approaches to solving problems were lifelong, and continue to this day.

Presidential candidates have often argued who would best respond during a late-night emergency. It is a very good question because all the campaign papers and promises can’t answer that question. The candidate’s past record on controversial matters is the best predictive guide. What is his or her inherent laser beam, the one that predicts his or her direction when pressed to act? There are no surprises, really; people have patterns to their actions.

Tell me about one’s record on wars, and assess their instincts on all critical issues, and we will know what kind of president they will be. Proven instincts say more than game plans.

Like I said….sage advice….hopefully people will take heed.  Fortunately for me I will not hold my breath.