This will not be a treatise on how to vote in the upcoming campaign for the District 7 seat in the Florida House of Representatives.

For one, my company has a policy that discourages endorsing one candidate over another in campaign.

Secondly, I view the right to vote as something sacred, something inviolate, and how or why anybody votes is really nobody’s business.

And, given my feelings on the right to vote, trying to convince anyone of how they should cast their ballot seems fundamentally wrong.

Finally, objectivity, or at least attempts at objectivity, is essential when one of the candidates is a man from your hometown and a person you know, respect and believe is a fine candidate for the office.

But, that said, I do have some concepts, ideas, principles that will help sway my vote.

And reading and viewing the media coverage of the House District 7 race based outside the county has provided plenty for me to apply against my own personal scale.

For example, there was some hoopla when U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz tweeted out in support of one of the candidates because he said they will adhere to President’s Trump’s agenda and policy.

My response: so what?

I have this silly hang-up about my state representative, believing that he or she should stick to Tallahassee and district work.

Little of that has anything to do with a federal agenda, be it immigration, tax cuts, or investigations or any what has stirred up such vitriol nationally.

Whether a candidate for state office would advance President Trump’s agenda seems, at least to me, on par with wondering if my Louisville slugger will help advance the Boston Red Sox’ hopes this summer.

My state representative, or least in my little world, should be concerned about the district, the residents of the district and their needs of that district.

How much that has to do with anything at the White House somebody would have to explain.

And, before any kind reader takes me to task, this has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican, right or left, the President, his critics.

And old adage holds that all politics are local.

The more I observe the national media, the less it seems to be operating or covering in a language, and world, I understand, let alone want to understand.

Now, as to personal behavior, I would also tend to sway away from any individual of candidate age who challenges another to “step outside” to settle a disagreement.

By all accounts, that is what happened during a party gathering in the district where two candidates had what was reported to be a somewhat loud disagreement that nearly came to blows.

And ended with the aforementioned “step outside” comment and unproven and disputed allegations that one candidate touched the other’s fiancée.

Diagramming this one is easy.

A grown man, a man in middle-age shall we say, requested another grown man to step outside, the modern equivalent of the glove slap to the face from the age of dueling.

And, in the arc of a modern lifetime, words not all that far removed from the children’s sandbox.

A threat too many boys tossed around until that time, and it will come, they stepped outside and returned to consciousness looking up at a circle of faces wondering if he was okay.

After that, friends, “let’s step outside” are words to forget.

That is a child talk.

So, if that is a fall back position at a party fundraiser or gathering, the take from here is that would be a scary person to have in office.

Not finding support for a bill; let’s take the opponents outside and beat the snot out of them.

Didn’t like that reporter’s question? Take them outside and put up the dukes.

Not going to be my candidate, I’d wager.

What will also weigh in the voting booth, at least for me, is what the candidates have to say about, you know, something crazy like actual issues: workforce housing, education and vocational training, economic development to name a few.

Nutty things like that.

Back-and-forth about fundraising, about who supports who, is all white noise.

The candidate who emerges, in my naïve little world, will be somebody I consider above personal loyalties via election support, financial or verbal; sufficiently professional to be trusted with working for the district.

A candidate, I would add, who does not see election solely as a stepping stone to future elections and offices and who actually comprehends the concept of public service.

And that sort of comes down to what one Supreme Courts justice said about obscenity and pornography: I’ll know it when I see it.

And a lot of what has been seen and read about on the campaign trail in House District 7 has, unfortunately, provided considerable evidence of what is utterly distasteful about elections and politics.

The upside, I suppose, it certainly helps one make up the mind.