Although both column’s were interesting, I identified more with the column in your previous post. Although Shafer does offer a different perspective that I found interesting, I don’t think we should really be comparing elections with horse races. Sure, someone wins. Yet, someone wins a chess match too, and I hardly equate a chess match with a horse race. Since I can’t really think of a better system of getting voters interested maybe the horse race mentality really is the best way to cover campaigns. Yet, I find it hard to believe that there isn’t a way to focus a little less on numbers and a bit more on issues.