Anyway, this is my written and un-edited response below:

The Chinese proverb “pulling up a crop to help it grow” comes to mind, in this case. See, when it comes to choosing a leader for the top office, the public (American and British as good examples) see themselves in the mold of a farmer. Patient and impatient at the same time, these two publics would normally assume to have help seeded, watered and pulled up the older candidate to the point of running for the top office. This is like a farmer would to a crop.

For a while, the crop seemed to have grown taller and taller, and they loved it.  But now that crop is fully grown and they could well see through it’s roots.

And this is where the pruning hook type of judgement comes in.

Because they (the wily American and British public) now have to decide whether the crop is still well rooted or withering because the root is no longer deep.  Meaning, if it is well rooted, then there is a case to be suspicious…it has nothing new to offer.  If it is not as rooted as they expected it to be, then it is considered – short-lived, fleeting, less candor and withering with no joy…so they’d rather go for a bud – something still rooted in the earth, something still fresh and about to blossom.

In short, choosing a top candidate becomes a game of four elements to these two particular public(s).  First is social demand.  Second is social expectation.  Third is social need and fourth is based on the effects of choosing a candidate by implying too much.  Afterall “Who else but the tax payers feels the effect of their actions the most” I think George Washington said this (not too sure)

With all these in mind, the younger and less experience candidate with a clean slate and no legacy – other than his/her own persona to behold and be responsible for catches up faster in this game of “mad dash for top office.”

So, let’s conclusively say, favoring a young less experienced candidate for the choice of office is the voters ways of being succinct, realistic but at the same time flexible and open to new, without giving in to the credit boldness as a result of formed opinions.

It is a time when people see themselves more as a nation rather than a group or part of an ethnic group.

Another way to explain this type of public choice is to refer to a reflective text written on a Pharaonic tomb (probably) after exodus, “Israel is laid waste, but it’s seed is not.”  Break this text into two (as separated and as made easy by the comma) and you’ll begin to see the strands.

My point is, the public in these two reformed Christian nations (by instinct or by reason) have been brought up in oral literature, written texts and democratic history to always compare the effect of Moses actions on the Isrealites during exodus.

First as a wandering dicator, sacking through cities and villages for fourty years in the desert, in contrast to the ever committed, ever loyal Joshua.  How they put up with Moses for so long and the price they finally had to pay when it comes to making the final push across the Jordan river.

I have looked at the list of all running for office, and frankly speaking, none is good enough.  The world has changed so much and they can’t see it.

Forward looking Mitt Romney or Jon Huntsman Jr. could have made all the difference, but they both pulled out leaving me, Abbey Samuel Laurel-Smith in the position of a “place-holder candidate” for President, United States, 2016.

Believe it or not, I will not only campaign to RebuildUSA.today, I will bring America out of God’s shadow.  I will lead America to walk hand in hand with God and by God’s side…or where else will you be if God wants to know you by name?

So Mr. Anon, I implore you to pass this message on to friends, colleagues, family and friends.  And please do not hesitate to join and support my campaign at http://RebuildUSA.today.

I am currently arranging “a date with Christ” for Americans nationwide.  Keep in touch and whatever help you could offer (should you decide to) will be well appreciated.