Since you invited dropping a line about our thoughts on U.S. News's presidential coverage ["Don't Vote Until You Read This," October 27], here goes. I've appreciated the detail, relative absence of bias, and pros/cons sections included in each issue lately. The articles are generally well written and well thought-out. Your journal is kept family-friendly and objective. Due to limited funds and school/work responsibilities, TV coverage hasn't been available to me, so I've depended on U . S . News (since first subscribing in February '08) for keeping up with goings-on nationally. In short: exceptional journal—excellent job. Thank you.
George C. Quillin
Fort Worth, Texas
It is clear to me that U.S. News is no different from any other left-leaning publication and that your writers are in the tank for Barack Obama. Consider the strategically placed ad with a picture of the African-American boy opposite the "The Ultimate Voter's Guide 2008" cover story that infers that this is the candidate as a youngster.
Our copy of U.S. News came with your admonition not to vote until we had read your column. The only problem is that we had voted on October 20. My husband likes to vote early "just in case." At 85 and 83, we want to be sure to get our votes in. You have good reasoning about waiting, but I really am tired of what's going on. Incidentally, I've followed U . S . News since a professor recommended it when I was in college a long time ago (FSU 1947).
Signal Mountain , Tenn.
Our two major political parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, have given us two of the weakest candidates in many years for the presidency. Barack Obama is young, inexperienced, and naive. John McCain is old, experienced, and over the hill. The American people deserve better.
Martin J. Rodgers
My ballot is marked, sealed, and in the mail. Your magazine, and one of your competitors that I read, did not say anything about third-party candidates—issues, biographies, or otherwise—which gives credence to the perception that the United States is only a two-party system. Perhaps everyone would benefit if the election duration is six or seven months from the first primary until Election Day. This could reduce the cost of campaigns, keep the candidates focused on the issues, and maybe even reduce the long knife fights and bloodletting. Third-party candidates might be able to get their messages out. Government might benefit because candidates of all stripes could attend to legislative or executive business a little longer. Less jet-setting would demonstrate a concern for the environment. Moreover, a reduction to six or seven months might prevent stagnation and exhaustion, compared with this 11-month marathon. With nearly instant communication and media coverage, and pundits' analysis and opinions just as quickly, everyone is still kept informed of what a candidate does, says, or where he/she visits. I am exhausted and ready for this election to be over. I am reasonably confident that whoever wins whatever office, wherever, government will transition peacefully and in an orderly way, and our nation's great experiment will continue a little longer.
Garden Grove , Calif.
The national debt and the high school dropout rate both indicate that the United States is moving full speed ahead toward bankruptcy. I wish I'd seen more of these topics in election coverage. We have a Republican Party that reduces taxes yet spends too much and a Democratic Party that taxes and spends even more. Spending money that belongs to a future generation is tantamount to taxation without representation, and the dropout rate suggests a future generation that will be bursting at the seams with too many people who cannot produce or compete. This country is screwed up, and neither party nor its candidates are close to delivering a path out of the hole we are digging.
Lancaster , Calif.
The 2008 election is one that has brought me a newfound interest in politics after 25 years of voting. I can't "wait until Election Day" to decide who to vote for, but I do take in all I can about each campaign. I do have a genuine fear that I will pay dearly if the citizens elect a Democratic president. I like the experience of McCain and the freshness of Palin. Both parties are making many promises I don't believe they can realistically keep. But I do think both candidates will try to do what they feel is best for our country.
Comment by Dianna of NJ
In this election I feel we are overwhelmed with ads, news, and emotion. People on both sides are spewing over with hatred against the other side. It's not the economy that is depressing, it's this election and the suspense and anger it is deliberately causing. The media and the candidates are running these elections like a horse race, with neither party representing the real majority of voters, the moderates. When it is finally over, the anger the losing voters will feel is frightening. Unfortunately, once the election is over and reality comes into play and the "change" both candidates promise never happens, the anger and blame will boil over. This election has brought out hatred between voters like I have never seen.
Comment by Wasserman of NY