Reading this political candidate's bigoted comment about her rival, a Catholic father of a large family, put me in mind of two simple political rules of thumb I've heard and used well in the poll booth over the years:
1. The best candidate is both moral and intelligent, but lacking such a candidate, it is far better to elect a moron who is moral than a genius who is immoral.
After all, immoral leaders do evil, which is far more harmful than almost any foolish thing a moron can do. Furthermore, ignorance can be easily cured with education and experience, but immorality requires a much more radical cure: conversion. Similarly, Winston Churchill has been popularly quoted as replying to a woman who accused him of being drunk: "Madam, you're ugly, but tomorrow I shall be sober!"
2. (An adage that I have yet to see properly attributed:) "If you want something done, ask a busy person to do it."
A busy person is often used to getting things done more-or-less efficiently and is less likely to meddle in what is not his business. Bored/lazy people have plenty of time to mess-around in others' lives -- and little good to show for it.
So, when I vote in November, I'll be looking for the pro-life/pro-family (moral) candidate who has the best policy ideas, and the one who has shown that he gets things done. Sadly, in the current political climate here in California, most candidates can't even make it across the moral threshold, so I'm often rendered a one-issue voter. That's fine with me, though; if a candidate won't even support the right upon which all other rights are based -- the right to life -- than he is both too immoral and too foolish to properly handle any other issue facing us.