In a New York Times op ed published last week, writer Paul Krugman says:
But policy proposals offer a window into candidates’ political souls — a much better window, if you ask me, than a bunch of supposedly revealing anecdotes and out-of-context quotes
In that vein, he looks at the proposals of the presidential candidates regarding the mortgage crisis and concludes:
All in all, the candidates’ positions on the mortgage crisis tell the same tale as their positions on health care: a tale that is seriously at odds with the way they’re often portrayed.
Mr. McCain, we’re told, is a straight-talking maverick. But on domestic policy, he offers neither straight talk nor originality; instead, he panders shamelessly to right-wing ideologues.
Mrs. Clinton, we’re assured by sources right and left, tortures puppies and eats babies. But her policy proposals continue to be surprisingly bold and progressive.
Finally, Mr. Obama is widely portrayed, not least by himself, as a transformational figure who will usher in a new era. But his actual policy proposals, though liberal, tend to be cautious and relatively orthodox.
Just a reminder to those “Democrats” who say they will vote for McCain in the fall should their preferred nominee not be chosen.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
I really do wish this had been the prism through which most folks considered the race. I suspect things would be quite different, at this point. (Tho’ I’m not sure I’d label Clinton’s proposals “bold and progressive” as a group.)
But we select presidents with the electorate we have, not the electorate we wish for, I suppose.
Written by the last voice of opinion sanity at the NYT. Dowd continues to be shrill and irrelevant in the stupidity of what he deems important and Rich is blowing with the current wind without a backbone.
And what electorate do you wish for, BM, the felons?
No, just people smarter than you. It’s not asking for much at all, really.
So you’d support requiring people to pass a test before they can vote?