How To Choose Whom To Vote For

[Ichini_Sanshigo]

@WF_Tomba

Seven rules, applicable to any country that practices representative democracy:

2. “Character” is bullshit. Con men make their living off people’s naive belief that they can judge the character of someone they don’t personally know.

Yes.

Also, I’d replace number three with:

@Alessan

Platforms and positions are bullshit. They’re the sweet nothings politicians whisper in our ears to get in our pants. They never have anything to do with reality, and they never will.

I understand that some of a politician’s background is bound to be bullshit or fluffly filler material, but looking at what they’ve actually accomplished as part of their public service is just about the only way to get any sort of sense of their honesty. Strike that. Any sense of their commitment to their constituents.

[JXJohns]

@Richard_Parker

I understand the undecided voter who does not know how to weigh two issues, say pro-life vs. pro-gay rights. Such weighing is difficult and complex.

I agree

I do not understand the undecided voter who claims that both candidates are simply too far off the mark. The idea isn’t to pick only the candidate who perfectly matches your preferences. The idea is to pick the one who most closely matches them.

Agree again. At this point in the race however, I am not sure that either candidate comes out ahead.

… The idea that either candidate must meet some personal threshold before you offer your support is irrational isn’t it? …

Since in my state O’bama is a double digit leader, yes the whole thing is a bit of a farce. One more vote wont really matter either way. But if I don’t have a personal threshold, exactly upon what do I make a choice?

I am a strident pro gun person. Neither candidate is especially strong when looking at their voting records, statements, or based upon the circle in which they congregate.

I am pro choice, but anti abortion. Based upon that criteria alone, neither candidate exactly speaks to me. Obama may feel the same, but to see the microcosm of his support on this message board alone, his followers are not as middle of the road on the issue. The same, though opposite, can be easily said of McCain.

Regarding the economy, I don’t think that either one of these boneheads have a clue about what it will take to restore some confidence back into the markets and the American economy as a whole. They both preach tax cuts, but McCain wants to keep us at war, at what cost? And Obama wants heath care for everyone, at what cost? At the end of the day the balance sheet is still in the red and both initiatives - war with Iraq and UHC, sour my stomach.

Both are like-able enough, and both have their share of stinky pasts and acquaintances. Obama is a Chicago Bears fan which means he is at least long suffering. Not sure if he is a Sox or Cubs guy, that could be the one issue that actually gets my vote or not, pathetic as that may sound.

I liked Bill Richardson in the Iowa Caucuses. The Republicans were a major FAIL regarding the candidates that they offered.

Granted, in some sense, all voting is irrational. Better to plant a tree or something. But if we’re operating under the premise that voting is important, your position seems very odd to me.

If it wasn’t important to me, I wouldn’t be discussing it with you.

[Hampshire]

8. Watch ALL of the televised debates, however DO NOT watch or listen to any of the commentary by the media before or after trying to tell you who won and why. They all have their favorites and their own agendas and will disect the whole thing into soundbites to fit their position.
   Use factcheck.org to answer any questions you have.

[WF_Tomba]

@Alessan

Right. Because politicians are always willing and/or able to keep their campaign promises.

Platforms and positions are bullshit. They’re the sweet nothings politicians whisper in our ears to get in our pants. They never have anything to do with reality, and they never will.

Even if specific promises are not kept (and are frequently unrealistic anyway), they do give you a pretty good idea of what kind of policies the candidate would pursue in office.

A study was done in 2004 that found that most members of the U.S. Congress do keep most of their promises: NPR radio report

Another example: check out this page, posted in Nov. 2000, which lists George W. Bush’s campaign promises. It resembles very closely the domestic agenda he has pushed for as President, does it not? Unfortunately, no one asked him “how would you respond to a catastrophic terrorist attack against the United States?”

I actually have decided to amend Rule 3, though, because I was thinking of an election with no incumbent running. Most elections are not like that, so:

3 (amended): Examine non-incumbent candidates’ past careers for one thing only: signs of corruption.

[WF_Tomba]

@Richard_Parker

The idea that either candidate must meet some personal threshold before you offer your support is irrational isn’t it? It is not as if withholding your support somehow encourages candidates you prefer. Instead, you merely shut yourself out of the political process such that your favored issues are marginally less relevant to the campaign.

Well, I don’t think that there’s a problem with having a “threshold” for your vote. The problem is making it known. Non-votes aren’t counted at all, and even in elections with the option of voting “abstain” or “none of the above”, these are all lumped together in one category. Whatever specific message you were trying to send by withholding your vote is lost. But you can solve this problem by making your opinion known in other ways; it just takes a little more work.

[IdahoMauleMan]

I use the 65-30-5 rule. As in, weighting factors out of a total of 100.

1. The 65. Fundamentals. Big Picture. Basic Philosophy and Tenets

• What is the role of the federal government?
• Do you think it is too big, too small, currently focused on the right things? The wrong things?
• When do you leave something for Congress, the States or local governments to decide? When do you say ‘this isn’t my job, nor should it be’?
• What role does the judiciary have in interpreting the Constitution? What type of justices will you nominate?
• How do you see your role as President? What are your top 3 priorities for the next 4 years? Where will you spend your time and energies?
• What role do you think America has in the world? How do you define that philosophy?

I actually am not that interested in where a candidate stands on a particular issue at any one moment in time (e.g. abortion, guns, offshore drilling, FNMA bailout, etc.) because the President will ultimately have to work through Congress to reach an executable outcome.

I’m more interested in whether his/her stance on a particular issue stems from a consistent philosophy, as articulated by the answers to some of the questions above. Otherwise I roll my eyes and put another check mark in the ‘pander’ column.

For sake of this argument, I also assume the candidate has enough experience to be a legitimate candidate so I can evaluate him/her on…

2. The next 30. The Track Record

• Have you actually translated the philosophical stuff in bucket 1 above into real accomplishment? Has the needle moved in a positive direction because of your presence?
• Can you compromise around the edges when need be with the other side?
• Will you stand firm and risk losing a popularity contest when the wind is blowing something too far away from your core principles?
• Are you a good manager? Do you surround yourself with good people and listen to them? Do you make well-timed decisions?
• Do you listen to the American people, without succumbing to poll-driven action?
• Will you communicate with the American people to help them understand why you are doing what you are doing?
• Will you stand firm with them important leadership moments?

Some folks score well on bucket 1 and fail miserably on bucket 2. If that happens it can swing my decision.

An example of a spectacular failure in this regard was the Republican ‘Contract With America’. I think most Congresspeople stuck with that for about 24 hours until after they were elected. Then is was back to the basics - pork, trading favors, protecting incumbency, etc. The usual.

3. The 5. Bits and Pieces. Eyebrow-raising quotes, gaffes, unfortunate comments made under stress (but that usually reveal something deeper, as many stress-related comments do) and other things that shed a light on the candidates’ character.

• Having your wife’s astrologer in the White House
• Getting off a quickie with an intern in the White House
• Acting as an unelected official, declaring that a health-care plan designed by 500 lawyers that will appropriate 14% of our economy is ‘final and non-negotiable’
• Giving a Russian criminal a bible and believing you saw ‘eyeball to eyeball’
• Struggling to put on duck-hunting outfits in Ohio, and deliberately dropping a few f-bombs in front of the media to prove you’re ‘a real man’ and not an East Coast liberal elitist
• Throwing your pastor of 20 years under the bus as soon as it became clear he was a liability, and claiming none of his fire-breathing Anti-American sermons meant anything to you during those two decades
• Not knowing how many houses you own

This bucket rarely sways my vote. I think a lot of it is just noise. You can drop a lot a pebbles in this bucket and it usually doesn’t tip the scales one way or another for me. In fact, it only made the difference in one election in my lifetime.

[J_Cubed]

@JXJohns

I am a strident pro gun person. Neither candidate is especially strong when looking at their voting records, statements, or based upon the circle in which they congregate.

Do you believe there’s a definite chance all or most guns will be outlawed in this country? Are there any guns you would own but are illegal for you to get?

@JXJohns

I am pro choice, but anti abortion. Based upon that criteria alone, neither candidate exactly speaks to me. Obama may feel the same, but to see the microcosm of his support on this message board alone, his followers are not as middle of the road on the issue. The same, though opposite, can be easily said of McCain.

It sounds like your thoughts on the subject are being influenced by a strawman. Nobody is actually pro-abortion. It is icky, and I don’t any woman is super-proud of having one. In a world of perfect education and habits, it would barely have to happen. The thing is that it’s the Democrats who both preserve the option and try to make it less likely. The Republicans just play “why are hitting yourself?”.

@JXJohns

Regarding the economy, I don’t think that either one of these boneheads have a clue about what it will take to restore some confidence back into the markets and the American economy as a whole. They both preach tax cuts, but McCain wants to keep us at war, at what cost? And Obama wants heath care for everyone, at what cost? At the end of the day the balance sheet is still in the red and both initiatives - war with Iraq and UHC, sour my stomach.

Well this one is easy: do you want to pay taxes so we can kill people or heal people? As far as the importance of UHC, I hope you’re just pessimistic about the implementation instead of opposed to the concept. I mean, if you have health insurance through your employer, you’re paying for it already, as well as the ER visits of people without health insurance. If you pay to get those people to go to a regular doctor, it’s cheaper in the long run, and your busboy is less likely to give you the flu.

@JXJohns

Both are like-able enough, and both have their share of stinky pasts and acquaintances. Obama is a Chicago Bears fan which means he is at least long suffering. Not sure if he is a Sox or Cubs guy, that could be the one issue that actually gets my vote or not, pathetic as that may sound.

He’s a Soxsider. (I hope that helps!)

Anyway, to contribute to the topic, here’s one way people shouldn’t choose whom to vote for:

@a white working poor mother of five

Im torn over whom to vote for this election. Hillary was my choice, and still at this moment is. I know, I know. I cant vote for Palin, shes against what I am for. I cant vote for Obama, hes just a jack ass politician from Chicago, which scares me more than Palin being VP. I know we cant have another 4 to 8 yrs of Republicans, my bank account cant take it. But where does that leave me? I cant vote for someone I loath. Im in that rock and hard place.

With the context of her previous posts, this subtext here is obviously racism. She can’t bring herself to vote for a black man even if he’ll help her feed her children. I just want to shake these people and yell, “he’s half white!”. :smack:

[Madd_Maxx]

@IdahoMauleMan

This bucket rarely sways my vote. I think a lot of it is just noise. You can drop a lot a pebbles in this bucket and it usually doesn’t tip the scales one way or another for me. In fact, it only made the difference in one election in my lifetime.

I would like to know, if you don’t mind, the circumstance of this one election.

[JXJohns]

@J_Cubed

Do you believe there’s a definite chance all or most guns will be outlawed in this country? Are there any guns you would own but are illegal for you to get?

I think that the sides who want nothing less are very cozy with the Democratic party. I’m not saying that the politicians take any marching orders from them, but there are certainly close ties that scare the shit out of me. Already in my life (39) through three strokes of a pen new full auto guns have been banned (1986) importation of “non-sporting” guns were banned (1989) and the worst, guns were banned by the way they look (1994 AW Ban). While two of the three of those items were signed by Republicans, that does not in any way diminish my concern for what Clinton did in less than two years as Pres with a Dem house and senate.

If they were able to ban guns by the way they look, and nothing else, what is next? Currently, at the federal level there are no guns that I cannot own that I would like to procure. I’d like to keep it that way. My state however has outlawed all class 3 and NFA firearms. That is a local issue not a national one.

It sounds like your thoughts on the subject are being influenced by a strawman. Nobody is actually pro-abortion. It is icky, and I don’t any woman is super-proud of having one. In a world of perfect education and habits, it would barely have to happen. The thing is that it’s the Democrats who both preserve the option and try to make it less likely. The Republicans just play “why are hitting yourself?”.

I certainly don’t think that whack jobs like Der Trihs and others here are indicative of the average Democratic voter. They are however members of the same party. According to them, all abortions should be legal and encouraged, even to the point of forcing doctors to perform the procedure and giving the women rides to clinics to get it done. That is just ridiculous to me. I agree that most don’t like the thought of abortions. The problem I have is seeing the lengths at which people will go to either protect the right as it is today or remove the right (i.e. abortion clinic bombings, etc.)

My wife required a late term abortion on one of our twins as a matter of health concern for her and the other twin. Without her ability to do so, her heath and that of my now 7 year old son was in jeopardy. I’m not just some flake on the outside with an opinion, I’ve been there and made the decision. One that we both cry about years later…

Well this one is easy: do you want to pay taxes so we can kill people or heal people? As far as the importance of UHC, I hope you’re just pessimistic about the implementation instead of opposed to the concept. I mean, if you have health insurance through your employer, you’re paying for it already, as well as the ER visits of people without health insurance. If you pay to get those people to go to a regular doctor, it’s cheaper in the long run, and your busboy is less likely to give you the flu.

I’d rather we don’t pay for either. I fail to see how it is my responsibility to pay for the insurance of someones kids nor do I think we need to be waging a war in Iraq. Sure I am paying for that health care now, through ER visits and taxes. Will I be paying less were O to get something passed? I think not. As an employer will I now be FORCED to give insurance to by employees, even though they all earn six figure salaries? Hell, they make more than me some years. Why should I have to pay for my own insurance, my share of my employees insurance, and then have to kick in to pay for Bob and Mary down the street’s insurance too?
[/quote]

He’s a Soxsider. (I hope that helps!)

Strike three… Go Cubs!

With the context of her previous posts, this subtext here is obviously racism. She can’t bring herself to vote for a black man even if he’ll help her feed her children. I just want to shake these people and yell, “he’s half white!”. :smack:

I certainly read nothing overtly racist in her comment. Chicago is full of jack ass politicians, black white and brown. I lived there for years.

[IdahoMauleMan]

@Madd_Maxx

I would like to know, if you don’t mind, the circumstance of this one election.

Presidential election, 2004.

A tiny bit I liked about GWB, and a lot I didn’t like.
A tiny bit I liked about Kerry, and a lot I didn’t like.
Some things I liked about 3rd party candidates, and a lot I didn’t like.

Then John Edwards came along. And a VP candidate shouldn’t even matter that much, but it tipped the scales ever-so-slightly for me against Kerry.

A slick trial lawyer with greasy hypocrisy oozing out of every pore of his body. What an utterly complete, total charlatan. I closed my eyes, hung my head and shook it with pity any time somebody told me they liked him. Liked what? The guys’ M.O.O. was to use every trick in his book to put one over on whomever happened to be in the audience at the moment. Tort trial juries. The Carolina electorate. His wife.

The champion of the little people. The environmentalist who razed prime forest to build a mansion. The railer against hedge funds and private equity who sat on the board of a hedge fund. The $400 haircuts.

And that was only 2004. 2008 brought even more comedy. Bringing his wife on TV to say that we shouldn’t talk about her cancer. Because this election isn’t about her cancer. So let’s not talk about her cancer. Her cancer shouldn’t factor into a decision to vote for Edwards. In conclusion, don’t factor in her cancer to your decision. Did we mention not to mention her cancer?

Then the affair. And the recent TV gig where he tried to do his puppy-dog-eyes-and-furrowed-brow-repentance act. But by then, thankfully, it was too late.

So that’s the only time. Sorry for the 5-minute response to a 5-second question.