Poker, Pigskin and the Presidency

The United States presidency should not hang by the thread of questionable Florida ballots. I therefore propose that we concoct an entirely different method to decide between our candidates.

One solution would be for Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore '69 simply to sit down and play a round or so of poker. Poker is a card game that requires skill, so this way we can evaluate both candidates' intelligence. The game also plays on notable characteristics of both men: Bush's charisma and Gore's "poker face." Obviously, both can work to the advantage of the players, so neither holds the upper hand.

And as long as there is no cheating involved, this will be a fair way to decide the presidency.

But regarding the issue of cheating, how can we ensure a fair game, with no aces up anyone's sleeve? Perhaps a different method altogether should be employed. Perhaps the men should simply form a coalition government, and head the country in harmony. They could govern side by side, and we could have two First Ladies and a number of First Children. They could all live together in the White House, as one big happy family.

This suggestion clearly has some obvious advantages: While presidents are often hard-pressed for their time and find it difficult to meet the needs of so many groups of people, the two men could divide duties. One negotiates with Israel, while the other talks with the Palestinians. One sorts out the economy, while the other deals with Social Security. In fact, this suggestion is so brilliant, perhaps it should happen every election. We make it as far as the conventions, and then the two winners can spend the next few months getting to know each other, having a couple of beers, becoming buddies, learning to agree on everything. But there's the rub.

It is a possibility that the two candidates might not agree on every issue surrounding the presidency--hence the need for an election. So then maybe Gore and Bush can just divide up the states, and be in charge of the states that support them. Bush can be in control in Texas and Kansas and New Hampshire and all the rest, while Gore leads Massachusetts and New York and California and such. Clearly this would make each part of the country happy, as every state gets the person it voted for.

This would, I am certain, almost definitely work if it were not for one slight problem--residence. Gore would get to live in Washington D.C. in the White House, since he got Washington's three electoral votes and Bush would--what? Build a second capitol in the Midwest? This would take too much time and effort. Dividing up the states like pieces of Halloween candy would not work so well.

What, then, will decide the presidency? If we really do rely on the counting of ballots, not only will the count itself be questionable and half the country be up in arms over the new president, but that new president will be forced to move to the middle of the political spectrum in order to attempt to please both parties and will end up pleasing nobody. We cannot allow this to happen. It would be a disgrace to democracy.

Obviously, there is only one solution left. It is the only fair way to decide the next president. It is chock-full of traditional American values. Tomorrow is the annual Harvard-Yale football game. Spectators and alumni from across the country will travel to watch it. Gore went to Harvard. Bush went to Yale. A coincidence? I think not.

We are left with no choice. Quite definitively, this is the only clear way to assign the Presidency. We'll get the game aired on national television, and every eye in the country will be trained on Harvard's fair football field. We'll wave campaign banners in the stands and open a presidential seating section. This is it, folks. The moment you've all been waiting for. Tomorrow afternoon, amidst a raucous crowd donned in Harvard and Yale gear, the next president will be decided. So play on--and may the best school win.

--Katherine M. Johnston