Today marks the start of the qualifying period for those who intend to run for municipal office in the Golden Triangle. Although some people have announced their intentions to run for office, it won’t be official until they have completed the qualifying process.

During these sorts of political campaigns, I almost always begin to think of one of my favorite films. In psychology, this is considered an example of “associative thinking,” a cognitive process that allows the mind to connect seemingly unrelated concepts and ideas.

Although romantic comedies are one of my least favorite genres, there is one “boy meets girl” film that is I would include among my 25 favorite films — “As Good As It Gets” (1997).

The film rises above the brain-numbing predictability of the rom-com formula – boy meets girl, they break up over some terrible misunderstanding, then find their way back to each other and live happily ever after.

The protagonist, Morris Udall (played by Jack Nicholson), is a balding, ill-natured, sharp-tongued, crude, filter-less misanthrope with an extreme case of obsessive-compulsive behavior. His one redeeming quality is that he is, inexplicably, a very successful romance novelist.

“How do you write women so well?” a star-struck receptionist asked Udall during his visit to his publisher’s office.

“I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability,” Udall says.

So that’s where the film begins.

The plot is about the transformative power of love and empathy. For Udall, that is achieved through getting to know his gay neighbor and an unlikely romance with a waitress that serves him breakfast.

Just when it appears there is hope for a real relationship, Udall says something deeply offensive, which threatens to destroy the budding relationship.

In desperation, he turns to his gay neighbor, Simon, for advice only to realize that while Simon is sympathetic he isn’t offering any solution.

“I’m drowning here and you’re describing the water,” Udall complains bitterly.

That single line in the film is what makes the connection with the political campaigns that will officially begin this week.

Depending on whether the candidate is an incumbent or a challenger, you’re going to be hearing a lot about what’s wrong – or what’s right – in the cities where they seek office.

These discussions almost always revolve around crime, education, economic opportunities and quality of life issues. You’re likely to hear a lot of moralizing, too, because that’s always been a political strategy, especially in the South.

Incumbents will tell you progress is being made on these fronts. Challengers will insist that things are worse.

Every candidate wants less crime, better schools, more jobs and residents of good character.

Presumably, by this point, any serious candidate for office has given them a considerable amount of thought that demonstrates not only that they have identified the issues, but have some strategy that can articulate to solve the problem.

Complaining about a problem is describing the water. It doesn’t prevent drowning.

As these campaigns begin, I hope voters will press candidates to not only identify the issues, but share some concrete, achievable measures that they intend to take to address them. It will make them better candidates who are better prepared to serve.

It is often said that in a democracy, we get the kind of government we deserve.

When voters drive the discussion and hold candidates accountable, the result is the kind of government we can have faith in.

It is not enough for a candidate to be well-intentioned. We don’t need anybody to describe the water.

What are they going to do about it, is what we need to know.

Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].

Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].