The Big Mo… most sports fans recognize this phrase. It follows teams and players that have the biggest following of fans. People don’t need to know why or how, only that these people are winners. If they are winners they have the support. It is the momentum of the fans.

This is also true of politics. However, in sports, people follow the winners for their talent and ability. In politics, the candidates get the big mo from their supposed electability.

In this particular election, the American people seem to be looking for a demigod, or someone superhuman – someone to right the wrongs and bring the country to a stable plateau of contentment.

One of the factors in deciding presidential candidates is whether they look presidential. People would not go for a president that looked like the average Joe. They want cleancut, suit and tie, every hair in place candidates.

What people would like to think of as the major deciding factors are the issues. People usually look at a candidate’s stance on war, economy, abortion, taxes, immigration, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights. These are major issues that large numbers of people can rally around. But Americans don’t always look at the smaller issues like foreign aid, family and children issues, transportation, and government reform. Even though they are smaller issues, they still can impact everyone.

Even though most people wouldn’t admit this, another deciding factor is religion. In the 1960s when John F. Kennedy was running for office, there was uproar because he was Catholic. There had never been a president who wasn’t a white Protestant male.

The same can be said for Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon.

Now, some of the norms of elections and candidacy are being thrown out the window.

If you haven’t been living under a rock for the past two years, you’d know that we have two minority candidates for the Democratic Party: a woman and a black man.

Because Bush’s past two terms have been disastrous, it allowed openings for new ideas and people.

A major deciding factor in a candidate is endorsements. The American people listen to endorsements.

Such is the case with Obama being backed by Oprah and Sen. Edward Kennedy. Perez Hilton endorses Hillary Clinton. If you turn on one of the many 24 hour news networks, they endorse candidates. Depending on the channel (Fox News, CNN, MSNBC), the major news networks will subtly or unsubtly endorse particular candidates. People trust these wealthy corporations and people, thus, they will elect a president on mere hearsay. Most Americans don’t do their research; they just listen to who endorses
whom. This is the Big Mo. It is a smattering of endorsements for candidates that rally the public’s attention to one particular candidate without any real research involved.

I stumbled upon an interesting website the other day, www.vote-smart.org, which shows voting records, endorsements, and interest group ratings.

Another small thing I noticed. With the Big Mo and endorsements, winning the Super Bowl is fairer than winning the general election.

Players on football teams at least strive hard to win, while presidential hopefuls ride on the coattails of endorsements, promises and pretty words. I encourage you to get out and do your own research and choose who you want to vote for.

This editorial was written by Carolanne Hines and expresses the opinion of the entire editorial staff