English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

When I was younger I thought it'd be a mistake to vote on party lines and to always vote for the individual. As I started voting, though, (and moving around) I discovered that it's nearly impossible to learn each candidate's stances on all the issues. They don't all advertise the same amount. I had to choose which issues were most important to me and find the political party I thought would address those issues. Sometimes, I just can't bring myself to vote for my party of choice though. Another problem comes up with primaries, in that instance you almost have to do the research on each candidate.

2006-07-22 12:22:14 · answer #1 · answered by froggyj5 3 · 1 0

Individual. Candidates may exist under the aegis of a particular party while still interpreting politics in their own way, even in opposition to members of their party. Examining a candidate based upon their record over the years is much more reliable than examining the party to which they belong. They're all over the map.

My state just recently restructured our primary elections, requiring that we must vote along party lines. It's made it impossible to vote as I want. I'm reduced to picking the best candidate for the office I think is most pivotal, then voting for the least objectionable candidates in the same party for the rest.

2006-07-22 13:20:34 · answer #2 · answered by functionary01 4 · 0 0

Regrettably, in the primary, our tickets don't allow us to vote individual, it's party. Darn it. I say individual. I don't believe there are very many left who really are straight down the line, no matter what die hard party pickers. I hope not anyway. Shouldn't everyone be selected for their own merit and what they bring to the table.....Lord, I woudn't want to eat half of what would end up on the table if it was all one way or the other with nothing inbetween. Make sense?

2006-07-22 12:25:52 · answer #3 · answered by Katieshouse 1 · 0 0

Political Party.....Any individual that you vote for can be run over by a bus tomorrow, leaving someone in power that you never voted for

2006-07-22 12:27:01 · answer #4 · answered by Ferret 5 · 0 0

For sure the individual. I can't understand how people can vote a straight ticket based on party, unless it's for the easy way out! Each candidate should be evaluated on their own merit. yes, then the elected groups will be unbalanced party-wise, but they need to be adult and work together!

2006-07-22 12:21:51 · answer #5 · answered by poppet 6 · 0 0

individual. grouping assumes attributes not necessarily present in every candidate. regardless of your political affiliation, there is always someone in the party who is a jerk and shouldn't receive anything other than his/her own vote.

2006-07-22 12:22:39 · answer #6 · answered by The Beast 6 · 0 0

In Scotland, no-one enjoyed Margaret Thatcher. She replaced into too precise wing for many Scots and the Conservative social gathering did poorly in Scotland on a similar time as she replaced into top minister. In 1989, Scotland became the 1st area of england to undertake the ballot Tax. As interior something of england, the ballot Tax replaced into incredibly unpopular in Scotland. This brought about devolution gaining popularity in Scotland. The events favourite devolution as a results of fact it may win them votes in elections.

2016-12-10 12:26:22 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Neither. I vote for ideology. Republicans are closer right now, but still they are the lesser of two evils.

2006-07-22 12:23:02 · answer #8 · answered by ouskip1998 2 · 0 0

Individual but they all happen to be Republican;

2006-07-22 12:20:36 · answer #9 · answered by netjr 6 · 0 0

Strictly Republican.

2006-07-22 12:20:48 · answer #10 · answered by Jenny A 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers