Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Carson, Clinton, Sanders. These are the candidates vying for the presidency. Who’s happy with the line-up? I’m not. In fact, since my last column, things still haven’t improved. There have been big changes, but none of them have created a shift to a more moderate candidate. The presidency should be held by a qualified, honest, level-headed person, and with this criteria, only Kasich wins. But he’s not a front-runner. Nearest to him would be Rubio, but he lacks a resume that would give him the qualifications and experience to run the United States. Trump, Cruz, Carson, Clinton and Sanders all don’t qualify. Trump continuously throws insults at somebody. Cruz lies, and his campaign has questionable values. Carson isn’t qualified. Clinton lies as well and has questionable ways of dealing with classified documents. Sanders wants to overhaul our society and in doing so may ruin our economy.

So who should get support? At this point, we are looking for the best of the worst. It can’t be Trump. I’ve tried seeing how he would act as commander-in-chief, and while he may have some moments of clarity on the trail, the other 98 percent of the time he insults someone. Would he actually get America back on track? Little of what he says actually has depth and detail, and his idea of how the world should work is not always logical. As Rubio somewhat hypocritically pointed out in the Feb. 25 debate, Trump repeats the same lines over and over. More and more, I get the feeling we don’t want Trump running our country.

Cruz definitely should not get close to the White House. First, he sends out a false email during the Iowa caucus saying Carson dropped out, later apologizing for the misinformation but resolute that CNN really reported the “fact.” Then he fires his campaign spokesman for falsifying a Rubio video clip. He can try to debate his way out of this mess, but that won’t make the facts disappear, and more people should see that a Cruz presidency could be full of lies and distrust. Then there is how he would run the country. He would most likely surround himself with a small band of extremely conservative core supporters. One can sense the gridlock that would come from that. His divisiveness would be dangerous for the future of America.

I won’t spend too much time on Carson. He should have dropped out long ago. On the debate stage, he is overlooked, and he still doesn’t seem to know exactly what he is talking about. It’s surprising he still has enough support to continue, but hopefully he will start seeing his campaign is on a road to nowhere.

I would be glad if Rubio or Kasich managed to overcome Trump and Cruz. They seem to have generally good ideas, coming across as level-headed in the debates; although since the last debate Rubio has acted less presidential. I would feel better with one of them in the Oval Office instead of Clinton or Trump. Rubio has some problems of his own though, such as his inexperience and repetition issues that were pointed out by Christie in one of the earlier debates. Kasich is notable in the fact that he balanced the budget in his home state of Ohio and has so far kept out of the mud-slinging between the front-runners. I appreciate how he seems to focus more on his views than attacking the other candidates. His problem is that he doesn’t always seem so presidential, and, at this point, not being a front-runner could be a mortal wound.

Unfortunately, it appears that we may have a general election between Trump and Clinton. Of course, I am holding out hope that Rubio or Kasich will somehow get a wave of support that carries them out in front of the race. But, between Trump and Clinton, I would be stuck. His demeanor and ideas might backfire, and he seems to go against some core values of America. He still doesn’t seem to quite grasp international relations. In the Feb. 25 debate, when asked directly how he would get Mexico to pay for the wall, he evaded the question while saying the wall “got 10 feet higher.” Like I said before, his ideas lack depth, and he seems incapable of giving detailed answers on issues. Clinton has problems of her own. She is a liar, as we saw with Benghazi and then her handling of the email scandal. Many emails on her private server have been found containing top-secret or above top-secret information. She sticks to the fact that none of the information was classified at the time. I really doubt that. Any government info that important should be protected by advanced security measures. And she stored it on a home server? What if it was, God forbid, hacked? So how, with this judgement, should she be president? However, she is smart, she has some experience, and she may be better than Obama at actually trying to reach across the aisle in Congress. In this scenario, it may just have to be Clinton.

Update — Super Tuesday results:

Donald Trump won seven states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Vermont and Virginia.

Ted Cruz won three states: Alaska, Oklahoma and Texas.

Marco Rubio won one state: Minnesota.

John Kasich and Ben Carson won no states.

Hillary Clinton won seven states and one territory: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and the Pacific Territory of American Samoa.

Bernie Sanders won four states: Colorado, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Vermont.

These results point to a probable general election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as discussed above.