I’m quite sure I’ve written in past, on the contrast that is the political left, versus the right.

At the risk of being redundant, I’m going to take some time to condsider that concept again.

This time though, I’m going to view things from a slightly different angle.

What I want to say to begin with, is that there’s a major problem. That is, not nearly everyone is using the same definition for these terms.

I think most people, asked who among the political class, is on the left and right, could agree on certain individuals.

Examples of those on the right, might be Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, and in many people’s minds Donald Trump.

Likewise, many would point to folks like Maxine Waters, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Chuck Schumer, and Joe Biden, as being on the political left.

Even in such categorizations though, there are more than subtle differences between one and another listed. As far to one side as Mr Schumer happens to be, it would be much easier to find similarities between him and, say Ted Cruz, than between Mr Cruz and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

That doesn’t mean Cruz, and Schumer aren’t miles apart in many important respects, just that left and right are at best, spectral designations.

If you think the distinction of who’s on the left, and what folks are on the right is hard when talking about known, elected members of the government, try looking at everyday people.

And one thing you pretty defintely can not do, is assume that because someone is known for left-leaning positions (or conversely, a tendency to be seen as being on the right), all attributes and postions of that person, fall on that side of the line.

The fact is, among black Americans, there’s a tendency in certain subgroups, to hold the social positions of someone on the right, and yet hold other views, that’re very much to the left of center.

For this reason, I have a tendency to refuse to accept, that many can be fit neatly into one camp or other.

The same can be said for the monikers liberal, and conservative.

Quite aside from the fact, that the words have different meanings in different places, the reality is, there are more than a few people out there, who hold some perspectives that would be counted liberal, and others, people would expect to see in convervatives.

So when it comes time to select leadership in elections at various levels, you can imagine there’s a certain amount of confusion.

Consider, for example, that part of the reason a given person voted, was to support the idea that, babies in the womb were just that, living humans (a very right-leaning, or conservative position). Now envision that same person, believed strongly, there should be certain social programs in place that no person on that same side of the aisle, would readily support.

At some point, that individual, is likely to have to prioritize. They’ll very likey have to ask, “Which thing means the most to me?”

It’s hard enough to make such a decision when someone on the ballot, holds many positions you count important.

It’s the much more difficult to make that call, when you must choose between one major factor, or another.

Think things are sufficiently complex by this point? Don’t worry, it becomes even more so as you look at it.

Imagine you decide the lives of unborn babies, to be your priority. At this point, you realize there’re three candidates (all conservative Republicans), who you trust to take stances, in line with what you support.

You look at the three, and decided there’s one with whom you agree, on other things. The problem? That individual is likely not electable. He or she, will very likely fail to win sufficient support, to be the one running in the final race.

So now you must make another choice. Who do you choose? One assumes, the one who might actually successfully compete against the candidate from the Democrat party, but really, you may have issues even getting that person into the last contest.

That’s because those who would be prone to cast their ballots for the Republican on a given ticket, may well not be willing to do so, for the person you would choose as the one most likely to succeed. That’s regardless how viable you see them as being.

To put it mildly, things are potentially horribly complex.

It’s at this point, I make my pitch.

Regardless whether in this election or any other; doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about electing a president, or a dog catcher, know what you want—what’s important and what’s not—and vote on that basis.

My warning would be, that a good many people will not do this. What they’ll do instead, is look at specific things done or said, and mark their x based on them.

Though it’s not something you have to think very hard about, most folks won’t look to the long term. They won’t look at what’s happened under given people, or administrations. They won’t care whether more than sixty percent of the population are happier now, than they were four years ago.

It’ll be all about some salacious gossip, or badly worded statements. It’ll be surrounding whether someone can’t remember that they’re not running for the senate, but for the presidency.

Forgive me for saying so, but that’s not how things ought to be. Rather, one ought to look at the records of those running—again, at any level—where they exist, and should only fall back on things like campaign promises if there’s no history to examine.

The point of this little article is this. Even if you could nail down what left and right, or Republican and Democrat, look like politically, how many people fit neatly on one side or the other? Are you honestely going to base your decision, on whether someone has an R, or a D behind their name, or instead, will you try to determine what that person has accomplished, by comparison to his or her opponent?

Thanks for reading, and may your time be good.