PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write

The question in the headline should be in the forefront of our minds as we head toward the 2020 election.

So far, 20 Democrats are running to take on Donald Trump. Only one Republican has filed to run against Trump, thusTrump will be the R nominee for a second term in the Oval Office.

Who knows which of the 20 Ds will win the primary to take on Trump?

So, back to question – how do we choose a president.

Washington Post editorial writers contributed these thoughts early this week:

“We think the best way to judge ‘electability’ is not through polling data or race, gender or geography. Instead, let’s try to judge who would make the best president.

“For us, the first requirement, in this cycle, is a fundamental commitment to the norms, habits and values of democracy. The best — and therefore most electable — challenger will be committed to civil debate and respect for opponents. She or he will embrace the nation’s diversity as an asset, rather than looking to divide with scapegoats and imagined enemies.

“Compromise will be accepted as a handmaiden of principle, not its opposite. Public service, and public servants, will be respected; Congress and the judiciary will be acknowledged as equal branches; law enforcement, intelligence agencies and the military will be understood to be beyond politics.

“The best candidate will understand the urgency of restoring U.S. leadership throughout the world, in respectful concert with democratic allies from Mexico and Canada to Japan and South Korea to India and Europe. While Americans have been paying too little attention, authoritarianism has been on the march.

“Just as in the 1930s, strongmen — today in China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and beyond — are seeking to snuff out freedom of speech, religion, and even thought. Just as President Franklin Roosevelt warned in the days leading up to World War II, if they succeed, the world for America will become a “shabby and dangerous place.’

“This time, they are promoting a model of control built on modern technologies of perpetual surveillance and monitoring. And this time, so far, the United States, which should be leading the fight for liberal democracy, has been, at best, missing in action.”

Consider the phrase from the Post – “The first requirement, in this cycle, is a fundamental commitment to the norms, habits and values of democracy. The best — and therefore most electable — challenger will be committed to civil debate and respect for opponents.”

On this, Trump fails miserably. So do most Democrats in Congress who head so far left as to be off any political spectrum while, at the same, eschewing any notion of compromise to deal with the nation’s pressing problems.

The Post advocates for a return to the times when “compromise” was not a dirty word. In fact, it is the exact definition of what government should be about, which is finding the smart middle where the best solutions lie.

Either the right or left extremes don’t work. Neither does the Trump approach, which is not right or left, but is more — do this my way because I am the smartest person around and the rest of you are worthy of only the derisive nicknames I give you – such as “sleepy Joe” for Joe Biden.

Now, to be sure, the state of the country’s economy will be top of mind for those considering how to vote – and economic realities always have been a major election factor.

Columnists Hugh Hewitt makes this point in a piece for the Washington Post:

“The first-quarter gross domestic product growth rate of 3.2 per cent sets up the first reality that will be noted in November 2020 because it telegraphs where the economy will be then: not in recession. Recessions are charted when GDP growth is negative for two consecutive quarters or more. That can and has occurred in sudden fashion — financial panics don’t send “save the date” cards. But the economy over which President Trump is presiding is strong and getting stronger. Innovation is accelerating, not declining. A recession before Election Day looks less and less likely by the day.

“Small wonder then that Trump dominates the GOP with an approval rating above 80 per cent. The administration’s deregulatory push is accelerating. More and more rule-of-law judges, disinclined to accept bureaucrats’ excuses for overregulation, are being confirmed to the bench. Readiness levels in the U.S. military have been renewed. Our relationship with our strongest ally, Israel, is at its closest in decades.”

All those facts bode well for Trump. I am inclined to say how unfortunate that is. What has happened is that, despite Trump’s immoral conduct in office, he will be getting a boost from a surging economy. Much of what is occurring cannot be credited directly to his account, for it has happened despite his petulance.

So, how do we choose a president? I’ll tell you later when I make my decision this time around, but a clue is that, for me, strength of character, morality, honesty and ethical behavior matter to me. Sometimes more than certain public policy developments where it is hard to assign credit.