Six months ago all the experts said that the democratic and republican races would be decided on Super Tuesday. The fact that the race for the democratic nomination is neck and neck suggests two things: that even "experts" are often wrong, and that today should be a very interesting day.

Throughout the state polls are open so that you can place your vote for both the Democratic and Republican nominations where the democrats are vying for 92 delegates and the Republicans for 40 delegates.

Mitt Romney's withdrawal from the race last week makes John McCain's nomination for the Republican Party all but certain. What's not certain is how McCain will unite the party once nominated.

The Republican Party is currently divided on what the major focus should be: Iraq or the failing economy.

Mitt Romney's withdrawal from the race was a huge act to try to bring the party together, unfortunately that's been the only act to try to bring the party together and McCain may have a hard time convincing all the Republicans that the main issue is continuing our forceful presence in Iraq.

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is still up for grabs.

To win the Democratic nomination the candidates have to win 2,025 delegate votes. According to the most recent CNN estimate Clinton has 1,139 delegate votes and Obama has 1,106.

Interestingly, most of the states Senator Clinton won were close races with a very small margin of victory but the states won by Senator Obama were blowouts.

According to president of College Democrats and College of Arts & Sciences senior Jason Rae, Wisconsin's primary is at a "perfect time."

"Wisconsin likely won't be the final decision maker but what we do here will surely help shape the rest of the primaries," Rae said.

So who should you vote for?

Answer: Whichever candidate's priorities most align with your values.

For me, it's Republican candidate Ron Paul. He has no chance of winning the Republican bid, but the democratic process was not invented so we could support the likeliest winner – it gives us an opportunity to support those who we want to represent us.

Moreover, what does it say about us as a country that a small town man who put himself through medical school and became a surgeon, served in the Air Force and in Congress since the 1970's, and who had the conviction to stand against the war in Iraq (and his party which supported it) has no real chance at becoming a real presidential candidate?

You must vote for whom you support on the issues, not because of their race, gender or party. The following is a breakdown of the candidate's stances on the issues.

On abortion, McCain is pro-life whereas Obama and Clinton are pro-life. However, where Clinton promises to codify Roe vs. Wade in federal law Obama opposes implementing a federal law.

When it comes to Iraq, McCain takes the "any means necessary" stance and supports keeping the troops there as long as necessary. Clinton and Obama both support the withdrawal of troops, the only difference between the two is that Obama voted against the war since its inception and Clinton voted for it.

As for the possibility of a future war with Iran, McCain believes military action is an option. Clinton voted for a September 2007 Senate resolution calling on the administration to declare Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, but will not take military action without Congress' support.

Obama, on the other hand, did not vote in the September 2007 resolution and says he will meet with Iranian leaders to reach diplomatic solution to problems in his first year as President.

When it comes to green energy, an issue at the heart of many Marquette students, McCain says he will not support subsidizing alternative energy sources.

Clinton promises to propose a $50 billion fund, paid for by oil companies, to fund investments in alternative energy, would double federal investment in basic energy research and would create a "National Energy Council" within the White House.

Obama proposes a different approach, he supports a bill that would reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, would invest $150 billion in clean energy over 10 years, supports next generation biofuels and would create a Global Energy Forum and re-engage with the United Nations on Climate Change.