A president’s name has to command respect

President Pete. Hmm. Not so sure I like that. Commander in Chief Bernie. Sounds weird. And maybe, the person who might one day have to make the toughest call in mankind's history and launch a nuclear war, and her name is ... Amy? Seriously? I mean, it's not a feminist thing, but somehow that seems like a job for a George, or a William, or maybe even a Herbert. Or a Bertha. Yeah, I could get on board with that.

With no conceivable reason to vote for any of the candidates who are emerging for the 2020 presidential election, I've decided to narrow down my choice by practical matters. Rather than the candidates' views on global warming, I want to know what their favorite Pop-Tart flavor is. Immigration? Who cares? What's your shoe size? Gun control? Forgetta about it. How many cavities did you have when you were 10? Health care? Yeah, right. Do you prefer mayonnaise or Miracle Whip? (Trick question, by the way. They both taste like scorpion vomit).

I think it's high time American voters place more importance on candidates' names, 'cuz, frankly, that's a heckuva lot easier than trying to decipher their 300-page tax reform proposals. This was a lot simpler to do back in the early days of the nation, when all men were named either John, John Quincy, Quincy John, George, Horatio, or Benjamin. Now, well, it's a nightmare. I mean, just think of 2016, when we had a Ted, a Marco, a Carly, and a Jeb. That sounds more like the members of a 1960s anti-establishment rock 'n roll band than it does a presidential primary field.

Starting with the presumptive Republican candidate, I'm OK with a Donald in the White House. Despite it's obvious cartoon duck connotations, Donald is a decent name, gentlemanly enough, masculine, and one that the Communists in China should respect. Jong-un? Who cares? His name is Kim. Be real.

The Democratic field has me concerned, though, and not just because it includes more looney-tunes than the 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit?' cast. We'll start with Pete Buttigieg, who is playing up the mono-syllabic punch of his first name as a campaign slogan. Mayor Pete. Pick Pete. Can't beat Pete. Sweet Pete.

Yeah, I know, make me stop already.

I'd have trouble voting for a Pete, 'cuz, I don't know, it just doesn't sound like a name you want on top of the United States letterhead, know what I mean? When I think of the name, I go to maybe gritty ballplayer Pete Rose, or my great uncle Pete, who used to give me crew cuts with an unsharpened cow trimmer. President Pete, though? Just not comfortable with that.

Then there's Bernie. Of course, the name conjures up the awful 'Weekend at Bernie's' movie, which features a pair of numbskulls wheeling their dead friend Bernie around town while pretending he's still alive. Given that Mr. Sanders is pushing 80 with a known heart condition, that's not the most unlikely scenario, you know. I mean, can't you see the Secret Service propping Bernie up at a podium after he's died in his sleep so the country doesn't panic?

Amy Klobuchar doesn't thrill me, either, namewise. Granted, Amy is a pretty moniker, feminine yet sturdy, but it's one that better fits the 12-year-old with pigtails who shows up at my doorstep to sell Thin Mints. Being president is a tricky gig that requires at least the presumption of toughness, and I'm not sure an Amy is what we'll be needing when we sit down face-to-face with a Boris and a Sergei and a Viktor at the World War III negotiating table. Elizabeth is a better option, but considering that Ms. Warren wants to give everyone free healthcare and give all college students free tuition and perhaps even hand out free Powerball tickets to all illegal immigrants, well, I don't really think we'll be having a Beth in the Oval Office anytime soon. Just a hunch.

Michael Bloomberg's name raises an interesting note. If the man goes with Michael, I'm good with him, but if he goes informal on me and wants to be known as President Mike, or egads, President Mikey, well, that's where I draw the line. I believe a president should at all times command respect, which Michael does. The same goes for Pete, who would be much more electable as Peter, or Bernie, as Bernard. I mean, William Jefferson Clinton had panache; Bill Clinton was a hillbilly who couldn't keep his cigar in his pocket.

Same goes for Donny Trump. Just doesn't work.

The exception to that rule, of course, was peanut farmer Jimmy Carter. One would have thought he would have needed to run as James to win the 1976 election, but then again, he was running against Gerald Ford. Homer Simpson could have probably been a contender that year. Looking back through the pages of history (yeah, they're kinda stuck together after I spilled that blue raspberry Slurpee), we find that many of our past presidents had distinguished names. Dating back to the first George, we've had John, Thomas, James, Andrew, Martin, William, Zachary, Millard, Franklin, Abraham, Ulysses, Rutherford, Chester, Grover, Benjamin, Theodore, Woodrow, Warren, Calvin, Herbert, Franklin, Harry, Dwight, Lyndon, Richard, Gerald, Ronald and Barack. Now that's an impressive list, not a Jim-Bob or a Butch or a Ricky Lee in the mix. Thank goodness, Newt Gingrich never quite got over the top. That would've turned it all upside down.

So I don't know who we're going to pick to run against Donald. Pete? Bernie? Amy? Michael? Joe? Tom? Elizabeth? None of them sounds very presidential to me, especially if we decide someday to put their image on some of our money. I mean, whadda' are we gonna be sayin? I'll give you two Petes for a George Washington? That's almost blasphemy.

Anyway, by the time we here in Wisconsin get our turn to vote, I'm guessing the primary field will be winnowed down to a person or two or three. I probably won't have to consider a Tom or a Joe, the way it looks, so I'll have to go with the best of what's left.

Of course, there is one more option. President Dean. Yikes. Gives me goosebumps.

THE

BORN

LESAR