Choosing presidential candidates

Unlike the legislative elections for the House of Representatives (DPR), where the outcome was determined by voters' links to and sympathies towards political parties, voters in the presidential elections, according to a general consensus of political analysts on a TV talkshow, will be motivated more by weighty considerations. The perceived "qualities", track records and characters of the presidential candidates will all be accounted for. On character, a deeprooted concern for the fate of the poor is likely to be a desirable trait.

This week may see a telling escalation in the candidates' campaigning as it is a build-up to the nerve-wracking presidential dialog at the Borobudur Hotel on June 30 and July 1.

There is no doubt each of the five candidates considers themselves the best choice for the next president. That be as it may, the outcome of the July 5 election is likely to ensure that only two hopefuls will make it to round two on Sept. 20 -- the historic contest for the nation's ultimate choice.

The public wholeheartedly supports the irrevocable pledge televised across the nation. It read: "Ready to win, ready to lose".

True to their pledge, all presidential candidates should be gracefully resigned to the their fate should they not win this national ordeal.

One presidential candidate, seen as a frontrunner in the race, came out with good advice on one TV program. He suggested that in any human actions involving contemplation or desire, God's ultimate judgment would prevail.

If this advice should sound too farfetched, one could follow simpler advice from a contributor to The Jakarta Post (March 23) who said: "Before we vote, let's look at the candidate and ask, can I trust this candidate with my life and the lives of my family?'"

S. SUHAEDI, Jakarta