Does anyone see the problem with having an all-John, all-of-the-time presidential ticket? I do. It's name tyranny. Just like Latinos who name their kids Jesus and Muslims who name their kids Mohammed, these two John's are trying to subtlely (or not so subtlely!) get out the message that John is the name that rules...literally. It is also promoting the stereotype that all Johns are thin, shaggy-headed, high-speakin' rich folks who ought to be respected and feared.
If the John power-duo wins, don't be surprised if the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and White House Chief of Staff are all Johns. Heads of agriculture, education, communications, EPA - Johns. Press secretary - a John. The secret service agents surrounding the presidential twosome - all Johns. White House interns, both men and women - you get the picture.
Not only will other names be eventually be undervalued and even disregarded, but the master plan would be to phase out all other namage. John would be the only name that counts. Why would you choose any other name when the only one that carries a positive connotation is John? This would lead not only to a form of authoritarian social tyranny, but a helluva a lot of confusion in the country in general.
So...before you punch that card...or touch..that...button, think about the long-term consequences. Safer to stick with George and Dick.