Ask Marilyn

In my opinion, we do not have a good choice for president in either of the candidates offered by the two major political parties, and as of now, I do not plan to vote for either of them. However, some of my friends say that if I don’t vote for candidate X, that’s the same as voting for candidate Y. Is this correct? —Dennis McGregor, Akron, Ohio No, and here’s why: (1) If you seldom or never vote, not voting this time has no impact; (2) if you often switch back and forth between the parties, not voting this time also has no effect because the same inaction applies to both; and (3) if you nearly always vote for the candidate of a favored party but refrain from voting this time, you do subtract from your favored party’s candidate’s count, which helps the opposition’s candidate, but not as much as if you both subtract from your favored party’s candidate’s count and add to the vote count of the opposition’s candidate.

Personally, I believe it’s just fine to cast a vote against a candidate by voting for his or her opposition, and Americans have been noisily doing this since elections began! It’s common for us not to exactly love the candidates for whom we vote or to think they’re the best man or woman for the top spot on the ballot. In other words, it’s OK for us to simply prefer one candidate over another for any reason.

Is it possible to increase one’s intelligence? —Santiago Mado, Medellin, Colombia I don’t think so. But I believe you can increase your ability to use the intelligence you have, which amounts to almost the same thing in practice. Few, if any, of us need to employ the outermost limits of our intellectual potential in life. If you could choose your occupation, what would you do for a living? Would you still be a national columnist? Would you be a movie star? A president? —Robert K., Stamford, Conn. I would be a Supreme Court justice. And I have all the qualifications: There aren’t any! (No, one need not even be an attorney.) No occupation is more intellectual or influential.