The Friedman scoring system? Simple:
"So, first, I’ll be looking for that honest diagnosis."
Honest? Washington? Yeah, right. As honest as that thing on Tom's head.
"And, second, listen for a plan that rises to the true scale of that challenge, one that proposes job-creating infrastructure investments tied with a program to stimulate more start-ups (which have slowed) tied with a credible deficit-reduction plan — that would be phased in as the economy recovers — tied with a plan to get more Americans postsecondary education."
Is this a run-on sentence, a description of how to judge a decathlon, or just Tom's typical blather. Me? I would be delighted to hear from either candidate the details of any plan at all.
"Third, the country wants a plan that is fair."
Thanks, Tom, but note my answers above: Fair? Washington? Spare me! A plan that is fair? How about just a plan?
"And, fourth, the country wants a plan that is aspirational — a plan that is about making America a great country for the next generation, not just 'balancing the budget.'"
Ah, yes, "aspirational." I suppose Tom is referring to something on the order of "hope" and "change," which have taken us far over the past four years.
And the winner is . . .
Sorry, but this time around there is a loser, but no winner, and the loser is America.