I don’t quite understand how to decide on whom to vote for in 2004. I’ve read some information about all sorts of people running for president. However, I don’t quite know what to trust. Much of the information provided is a bit biased. Also, when I read about the views expressed by the candidates it seems as if they don’t want to give away too much of what they are thinking. For many issues, they just give a simple answer and how am I supposed to know if they stand by it? Where should I look to find out the potential President’s political track record? If I find information about their previous political decisions, will it matter much, due to the popularity of view-changing and head scratching senate voting which deviate from politicians original platforms. I don’t want to make an uninformed decision. That is the reason why I’ve not voted, yet in my six years of eligibility and I’m not sure that I’ll ever be informed enough to make a reasonable choice. It doesn’t help that I’m agnostic and, along with that, I don’t have many principals/values regarding anything at all. Also, I’ve not been effected much, personally, by political decisions made by other people during my short lifetime (to the best of my knowledge). I’m as broke/yet happy as I was four years ago. Any advice?
First, decide if your personal opinions lean more toward democratic or republican (or whatever party you choose) ideas. Then, you can get some basic background on each of the candidates for that party. Libraries and newspapers are good for this. You can’t possibly know everything about everyone, so don’t sweat the small stuff. Watch the network news shows EVERY DAY. You can really start to get a feel for someone when you hear what he says and does on a daily basis.
Don’t be afraid to make a mistake. We’ve all been fooled, mislead, cheated, lied to, and rewarded during elections. Just go with your best judgement. You’ll get better at it as the years roll on. You’ll know who hangs out with who and who has friends that are always in trouble, etc. Good luck and Happy First Vote!!!
This is the best advice I’ve ever read on the subject.
I’d also recommend getting online to several good newspapers (not TV or radio pages), & looking up their various platforms–i.e. the postions that candidates take on important issues.
Consider campaigning for candidates in local elections, like City Councilpersons or County Commissioners. It can’t hurt to have these folks know your name if you have a problem that isn’t getting adressed.
I’m glad you’re getting involved! 
Heinlein, as usual, put it best:
“If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for … but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong. If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that a truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.”
Damn Two party system… Is it just me, or shouldn’t there be more than 2 ideas on how to run a country? Besides that, it seems to me that the lines between democrat and republican are very blurred. Personally, I try to vote for the candidate who seems least objectionable. Sometimes this is quite hard, seeing as they are all quite objectionable to begin with.
Still lamenting the fact that John McCain lost to Bush… Woe is me.
I agree. There are MANY more ideas out there that don’t get airtime because the two-party system is so strong. On the other hand, your vote doesn’t really count if you vote for the rebel parties, so voting for the lesser of two evils is probably… er…the lesser of two evils. They all suck. Some just suck slightly less.
Great suggestions everyone; thanks! I’m definately going to check out online news sources that aren’t tv/radio sites. I didn’t think of that. I guess the toughest thing for me is, I usually agree with the “rebel” parties and they aren’t going to win until something dramatic happens. Another problem I face is that I don’t care too much about what decisions are made in political venues, but I imagine that will change quite a lot when I get a career/house/children that sort of stuff. Thanks again for the advice, All!
Sometimes your local elections can have far greater impact on your life than the “big” elections.
Personally, I’ve developed a system. When dealing with unknown candidates:
- I don’t vote for the incumbent.
- I don’t vote for republicans
- If the incumbent is a democrat, I vote Green.
- If there is no Green candidate, I choose the least objectionable candidate from the list (ignoring candidates who seem to be running on their motherhood, religion or lack of experience and slightly favoring female/non-white candidates).
Of course, this means I rarely vote for winners, but I’m ok with that.
This system does not help when voting on the various propositions unfortunately.
Yeah, this beats actual research hands down. :rolleyes: 
sadnil —please post & let us know what you think!
I’m not familiar with Heinlein’s work or philosophy but the statement sounds suspiciously like sarcasm. So I went to a site with commentary on Heinlein and found this from an essay by Roberto de Sousa Causa:
A good portion of Heinlein’s reflections are polemical, and yield the author the none-too-praiseworthy labels of “fascist” and “militarist,” because in the future he creates, people acquire the right to vote only after two years of voluntary service to the State… Beneath it all, what Heinlein seems to propose is a meritocracy formed by people who, at some point in their lives, sacrificed their own interests in favor of society as a whole. As with many North American conservatives, Heinlein…was disquieted by the increasingly predominant view that the individual is benefitted by the State-maintained social organization without making a major pledge to society in return. In his opinion, those who made that sacrifice would have a greater sense of responsibility in electing their governing officials and charging them with better performance from the State. Those who did not accept that order of things would not be discriminated against, exactly… but rather, left outside the centers of decisionmaking.
This doesn’t sound like someone who encouraged frivolous voting attitudes or universal suffrage.
From my experience you just ask mummy and daddy and if you have the same level of education as them vote for who they tell you to vote for, if you are better educated than them…vote the opposite way. If they had tertiary education and you didn’t, you won’t take my advice anyway.
SAVE YOURSELF A LOT OF TROUBLE http://www.presidentmatch.com/
My system:
Vote for the person with the funniest first name if you don’t know any of the candidates or just don’t care. I once voted for two guys named Woody. I voted Nader that year for the same reason. Ralph is a pretty funny name. They should really not let me vote, but then again my state was voting Bush anyways so it didn’t matter.
My cynical side tells me many Americans follow a “logical” process something like what I’ve laid out below.
When available, vote for the incumbent.
When possible, vote for former Hollywood stars.
If not possible, vote for the best looking candidate.
With two equally pretty or ugly candidates, vote your race.
If both candidates are your race, vote for the wealthier.
If neither candidate is your race, vote for the racially closer candidate.
I am going to be very very honest here. Hope it doesn’t bite my ass.
Is there a particular hot button issue that you believe in? For instance, in my case it is abortion. I am strongly pro-choice. If there’s a candidate who is pro-life then I’m going to vote against him or her.
When it is a local election and I’m not familiar with either of the candidates, this is the way I vote:
-
I will vote for the women first.
Yes, I realize that women aren’t always the better qualified candidates, but I believe that we are underrepresented in the legislature, and I will always vote for a woman if given the choice. -
I will vote for Democrats.
Democrats tend to be more concerned about the environment and other issues I support. -
I will vote for the younger of the two, or the least experienced.
This is only the case when I have a dislike of the way the office has been run in the past. I feel that younger people have more fire and a will to change things.
This is my basic outline.
I will second the other posters when they say to look at websites and check out platforms. Platforms won’t give you the entire story, of course, but they are far more reliable than anything you will hear from the media. Look for the issues that you care about, and vote against the people who don’t care about what you do.
Watch the debates, too, and constantly evaluate every word that comes out of their mouth. Why are they saying what they are saying? Are they addressing the question? Have they switched positions? Do they seem flexible, reasonable, or mere parrots?
Hope this helps 
Voting is fun.
How does anyone decide who to vote for?
Personally, I think you’re asking the wrong question here.
Don’t decide on voting for (or against) a specific person. That just feeds the trivialization of elections now, with 30-second sound bites, personal profiles, favorite foods, and all the other crap the news media loves to talk about.
Instead, decide where you stand on major issues (you decide which issues are major to you) and then look at the political parties, and compare their stands. Generally, you will find that one party is closer to your views (on most issues–there are almost certainly some where you disagree).
So when you don’t have time to research every particular candidate, you can just vote for the candidate endorsed by the party that’s the closest match for you. And be pretty sure that candidate will be close to you on most issues.
This also leaves you time to investigate the more local offices, which often are less party endorsed than the big ones. And often those local offices affect you more directly than the national & state-wide ones.
To summarize: don’t think in terms of who to vote for: think of voting for the party whose positions most closely match yours.
P.S. This can also work by substituting for “party” any organization you feel strongly about. So vote for candidates endorsed by GreenPeace, PETA, NRA, whomever. Though often they may only endorse in the ‘big’ races, and only in some areas. Whereas the political parties are usually there for every race.
Probably, yeah. But not all Democrats or Republicans think alike, and sometimes two people from the same party can appear to have nothing in common. See the current primaries. So the options are not always just A or B.
If there are any issues that really matter to you, **sadnil[/n], you can look up different activist groups and see what kind of ratings they give the candidates. Those are usually based on their voting records, so you’ll get an idea of what the candidate has done in the past and might do in the future.
Don’t jump on any bandwagon. It’s just throwing your vote away. Before you’ve even arrived at the polls, the two parties have already bought all the votes they need. Therefore, vote your heart. Always vote your heart.
It matters !! In France during the last presidential election a lot of people were unhappy with everything. So they just said during the primary election (kinda selection vote for the 2 finalists) “hey, I’m not happy, I’ll vote far right in the primary election : they have no chance to win but it’s going to show them I’m not happy, and then I’ll vote normally for the finals”.
What happenned? The far right extremist went in the finals! The country was shocked!
** Every vote counts ! **