It has been interesting to read the various letters to this column supporting or decrying one presidential candidate or the other. Most of us are disillusioned that these are the best two candidates that our country of 345 million people can put forward. Certainly the virtual colonoscopies provided by our news media and political parties dissuades the vast majority well-qualified candidates from running. But here we are: The election is only a few weeks away and these are our choices (assuming that people choose to vote rather than sit the election out).Our world is in a precarious state today, with major conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, the very real threat of China forcefully taking Taiwan (the No. 1 source of the microchips that power today’s world), Iran on the cusp of a nuclear weapon, China and Russia pledging cooperation, North Korea launching many “test” missiles, the conflicting requirements of today’s energy requirements and tomorrow’s climate, our burgeoning national debt, national defense versus social spending, domestic mining of critical minerals versus environmental concerns, and the list goes on. So how to choose? Do we go for personality over policy, future promises over past accomplishments, the hyperbole of candidates or their records? Many people have made up their minds, but many others remain conflicted over which candidate would be best for our country in the long run. We need to choose very carefully: our choice will impact not only our own future but also reverberate around the world and tilt the globe towards stability or World War III. Ken MillerPark CityThe post Our national dilemma appeared first on Park Record.