Choosing a president is like selecting a spouse

As the presidential primary and caucus voting formally begins, many Americans remain either undecided or not firmly committed to one candidate, as the wide variance among the results of the numerous polls shows.

I like the fact that many Americans reflect on their presidential choice and take it seriously. 

Think about it like choosing your spouse. Love is vital. Chemistry matters. Candor, honesty and trust are critical. Similar perspectives on big issues count. We may ask ourselves big, future-oriented questions, such as “Will (s)he be good for our children?” and “Will (s)he stand by me in ‘sickness or in health’?” 

It’s not about only the emotion of the present, but our feelings of confidence in another person for the uncharted waters of the future. Or, to paraphrase my mother’s caution to me: “After the honeymoon fades, you need someone whom you like and respect.”

Four years ago, I had breakfast with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney before I introduced him to speak before a large, bipartisan audience. I opined that he was qualified to be president given his experience as a CEO, governor and entrepreneur. But I said Americans did not know him well enough, and he had to let them see his warmth. I said Americans would not hire someone for president they thought they did not know and love, or someone they thought did not know and love them.

Gov. Romney seemed to listen and consider my views, which was all I wanted. But I wasn’t sure I had gotten more – until the end of his speech, when he told the audience that he loved them! It was the headline in The Washington Post and other outlets the next day. His advisers must have then reasserted control, because I’m not aware of him ever saying it to another audience.

As with a potential spouse, a presidential hopeful must be more than good on paper.

For one thing, no candidate or party platform is likely to share all your positions. A recent Pew survey found more voters self-identify as independent than as Republican or Democrat – a trend that has ticked up since 2009. 

Both parties are collections of usually unrelated, single-issue groups: pro-choice, unions, trial lawyers, social-welfare spending vs. pro-life, business, anti-immigration, pro-defense spending. But in deciding whom to support for president, other, bigger factors should matter.

We should have enough emotional intelligence to know ourselves and know to consider factors such as whether we like and trust the candidate.

I view my decision-making like a triangle or pyramid, with the most important factors at the top. Atop my presidential-decision pyramid – the steadiness of the person holding the keys to our nuclear arsenal. As commander-in-chief, the president has the power to deploy the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, which could literally destroy humanity. I feel good about President Obama in this regard. I would also feel good about Sec. Hillary Clinton, and many of the less radical Republican candidates. 

My second criterion is leadership. A real leader inspires with a big-picture view. Think of President Kennedy’s “man on the moon” or President Reagan’s “shining city on a hill.” A real leader makes tough and even unpopular choices, and explains them in a way people can disagree with but still understand. Sen. Ted Cruz, in opposing ethanol subsidies in Iowa – a corn-growing state – showed leadership to me.

A real leader unites, rather than divides, the nation. In many ways, President Obama divided us, despite his 2008 campaign oratory to the contrary. This was new for many of us, as we felt other post-Nixon presidents focused on one America, sharing a sense we were all one nation. Sens. Cruz and Bernie Sanders are dividers, and for me, they fail on this essential criterion.

Leaders also manage enterprises, hire well, make tough budget choices, get along well with others and have compassion and empathy. None of the top candidates stands out on all of these. Like many of history’s greatest tyrants, Donald Trump has both the strongest positives and negatives as a leader. Trump knows how to run an enterprise and understands that people don’t remember what you say, but how you make them feel. But his spotlight-grabbing, attention-seeking neediness make him good for TV, not the Oval office – voters are looking for a thoughtfully-considered, long-term spouse, not made-for-prime-time, “I Want to Marry a Millionaire” schlock. 

At the bottom of the pyramid, my third-level criterion, is finding synergy on issues about which I care. None of the candidates running for president shares all my positions on social, economic, foreign policy and tech issues. The one criterion used by many political ads, at which I chafe, is whether a candidate has changed positions on an issue. Adults change their positions when new facts or situations arise. Candidates should have core principles, but we learn, grow and change our views.  

Another factor I consider, which others seem to ignore, is how a political candidate treats his or her staff and other people – including the Secret Service agents that protect them or even their opponents. This says a lot about a person’s integrity. It is why, before I hire someone, I observe them at a restaurant dealing with the wait staff or probe their references.

I’m skeptical of Clinton and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, as their maltreatment of others is legendary. And I won’t support New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s run for president, as none of his current or former employees has come forward to support him on “Bridgegate.” It’s also why I abhor the Bush family’s attacks on their “friend” Rubio for the things he did before he was supported by the Bushes in his Senate run. It’s why Trump’s attacks against every journalist, prisoner of war, Hispanic, Muslim or opponent questioning his supremacy are so unpresidential.

Using the rubric I outlined above, I support Republican Sen. Marco Rubio for president. Like President Kennedy, he can inspire the nation. I trust he will make good decisions involving our nuclear arms. His humble roots, financial challenges and immigrant background give him empathy with the vast number of Americans struggling to make ends meet. He also stands out on foreign policy. More, he is the only candidate extolling the promise of technology, the benefits of disruptive innovation and the importance of the American Dream.  

That is how I choose.  It comes down to “know thyself.” What factors are important for you in choosing a president?