Would You EVER Vote for a Candidate You Disagreed With on Almost EVERYTHING?

We all have our hot-button issues, and I won’t ask anybody to abandon his/her core beliefs. But we all know that, in a host of elective offices, the hot-button issues just aren’t all that important.

Example? Well, you may find it HORRIBLE that mayoral candidate Joseph Bleaux supports the death penalty, but the mayor has absolutely NOTHING to say about who gets executed (or whether the death penalty is legal in his state). So, can/should a conscientious liberal vote for Mr. Bleaux, knowing full well that his REAL duties will involve mundane things like getting the garbage picked up, and his position on capital punishment will be utterly irrelevant?

Or, you may find it terrible that State Comptroller candidate Mary Jones is virulently pro-abortion… but if she’s elected, she’ll be spending all her time poring over ledger books and trying to make accounts balance. In her official capacity, she won’t have any effect on abortion. So, do you vote for her, assuming she’s honest and has a strong accounting background?

If you don’t care for these hot-button issues, you can provide one of your own. If there’s a race for city/State Comptroller, can you lefties ever see yourselves voting for a Jerry Falwell disciple (provided that he has an MBA and a reputation for integrity)? Can hard right-wingers ever imagine themselves voting for a liberal mayor (provided he has a solid track record as an administrator, and he’s always gotten the snow shovelled in the winter)?
OR… does ideology trump all, even when ideology probably shouldn’t enter into it?

Mind you, I can see a dilemma, ESPECIALLY if you think the objectionable candidate might be using this office as a stepping stone to something else. If you suspect that Joseph Bleaux or Mary Jones will try to jump from City Hall/the COmptroller’s office to the State House, the Senate, or the White House… you’d have to consider ideology more strongly.

But assume that the candidate has no further ambition. Can you overlook drastic differences in ideology in SOME elections?

Remember a few years ago when David Duke was running as a Republican for the Senate in Louisiana? And a few years before that when the Lyndon LaRouche forces managed to pack the Democratic primary in Illinois and get several of their candidates on the ballot? I’m quite sure some of the voters in those states voted for the opposition even though they probably never a cast a ballot for that party before in their lives.

Well, sure … if he’d lower my taxes.

You don’t have to worry about politicians. They move smoothly from opinions to non-issues the higher they rise in government.

[hijack]
I’m pro choice. I’m not female, but I don’t want to dictate what a woman can or cannot do with her own bodies. If you are a religious zealot, let God be the judge. It’s not your business to judge anyone. Furthermore, I think that ‘life’ begins when the mother delivers a viable lifeform that can successfully survive without more external life support than the mother can provide . Nature made that rule, not me.

And, I am pro-death penalty. AND, I am pro-firearm ownership.

But these are personal opinions and, if they do not agree with the majority of voters, they are not law. Fine with me. I am also pro-democracy.
[/hjijack]

I did in my first election. I had been a Gene McCarthy worker. When Humphrey won by reneging on promises about dividing the California delegation, I would never vote for him. Nixon was obviously out, so I went with the Peace and Freedom Party state candidate, Dick Gregory, strictly as a protest vote.

It’s called voting for the lesser of two evils.

Quote
Example? Well, you may find it HORRIBLE that mayoral candidate Joseph Bleaux supports the death penalty, but the mayor has absolutely NOTHING to say about who gets executed (or whether the death penalty is legal in his state). So, can/should a conscientious liberal vote for Mr. Bleaux, knowing full well that his REAL duties will involve mundane things like getting the garbage picked up, and his position on capital punishment will be utterly irrelevant?

Or, you may find it terrible that State Comptroller candidate Mary Jones is virulently pro-abortion… but if she’s elected, she’ll be spending all her time poring over ledger books and trying to make accounts balance. In her official capacity, she won’t have any effect on abortion. So, do you vote for her, assuming she’s honest and has a strong accounting background? QUOTE

You may well vote against these people to attempt to turn the tide of their career. Often these offices are stepping stones to higher. Our current Governer was the state comptroller, then lt. governer, then governer.

Absolutely - I’m coming more and more to the opinion that I can’t vote for people I don’t respect, regardless of their positions. For ex., I would vote for McCain were he still around over Gore, even though I’ve never voted for a Republican in my life. As it is, I will vote for Gore, as I don’t respect either condidate, so I might as well vote the issues. I am going to vote for Lazio over Clinton, because, while I don’t know enough about Lazio’s character yet to judge, I do know Hilary’s, and I don’t want her representing me.
Sua

What? Your voting against Hilary and yet you aren’t a Republican? There goes that “vast right-wing conspiracy” theory…