I haven't really been following the primaries until recently, so I did an internet search and found this handy-dandy chart summary of the candidates' views on issues of import.

Click here

A few comments:

• It seems the candidate who best represents my views is Kuchinich, who is widely regarded as too liberal to ever get the nomination.
• The main differences between the top three Democratic candidates - Clinton, Obama, and Edwards - are slight. Obama's the only one against the death penalty, and against No Child Left Behind. He also is the only one with "mixed opinion" rather than "supports" the option of military force with Iran. On the other hand, Edwards is the only one who doesn't support the idea of a border fence. So at this point, frankly, what I am most looking for in a Democratic candidate is the ability to win a national election. And I think either Edwards or Obama have a better shot at that than Clinton. Although it would be nice to have a woman president, personally, I prefer either one to Clinton. But this is all to say that any Democrat would be better than any one of the Republican nutjobs.
• I am amused by the straight column of red X's under Ron Paul's name. Apparently, the dude doesn't support anything: abortion rights, the death penalty, No Child Left Behind, stem cell research, not even net neutrality, etc. etc. His platform consists entirely of negatives. The only things that he can be said to support are drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge, a border fence, immediate withdrawal from the Iraq war, and that the gay marriage issue should be left up to the states. Although I can't really get behind him, it's always fun to have a Republican wildcard. Really, the Republican primary will be the most fun to watch. At this point, I can't figure out who will get the nomination, and whoever it is, at least half the party is going to be pissed off about it.