Bill

No. I can't know.

I don't see much point in any opinion type attacks on a candidate. I have done that in the past. It serves no useful function, except to create a backlash.

excaliber is another case. He continually is in the pig pen, down in the mud and slinging. Whoever he may be, his support of Oberdieck is not useful. There are enough documented issues in this campaign to allow insightful decision making by voters without speculation.

Look at the records of the candidates in the EC. See how they voted. Examine the effectiveness they have on committees. Look at the positions taken by ALL of the candidates. We have a pretty good idea of where the president stands, we can ask one candidate anything we want, and the third candidate's record and accomplishments are on display.

As an example, and this type of thing has not been discussed much in this forum, we know that one candidate is at odds with the experts on li batteries. We know another is on a committee trying to entice new electric flyers into the AMA and has shown a keen interest in the technologies involved. We know one candidate has stated "I am not well versed with electrics. I guess at this point I really don't have a strong opinion or experience with them. Or what they are capable of."

On the turbine issue, one candidate was adamantly opposed to the new regulations. One candidate voted for implementation of them. One candidate voted against the new regulations. All documented, no guessing

These are real issues, with real documentation. If you are into electrics, or turbines, the documented facts may be enough so they may make a decision. There are many other issues where the facts are documented. The adherence, or lack thereof, to rules is also there for all to see. Pointing them out is one thing, throwing mud behind is another.

The words, acts and visions of the candidates are all documented, yet we wind up throwing mud. If we are going to discuss this stuff, why not use the facts instead of opinion?