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

People would have to research candidates. Kind of like taking a test at the polls, but on fair grounds...would more or less people vote?

2006-09-21 08:51:26 · 13 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

13 answers

I think it would be a little less. The percentage of people who would vote who are turned off the the corruption of the two major political parties would be offset by the people who treat politics as a religion and vote out of blind faith. But there are others who wouldn't vote but who do now because they wouldn't take time to research the candidates or issues.

If there was direct representation we would get something closer to what the constitution's framers envisioned. Now the politicians are enslaved to the national party and forced to vote party lines, regardless of how it effects their constituents.

2006-09-21 09:05:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

If there was no dominance of democrat and republican parties, I probably would have voted for the conservative 3rd parties. Buchannan, I think his name is? he had some decent ideas, but there's no way i can vote for him without considering it a waste of a vote. And Ross Perrot. I would've voted for him.

But I'd think that most people would vote the same way. People vote for certain political parties because the parties hold up ideals that people believe in.
But the parties are now more powerful than the people. I think that most democratic candidates would fall apart on the stage, and also most republican candidates.

The strongest individuals seem to be leaving the bigger parties because they can't stand the regimented system of using parties for votes instead of presidents for power of change, and they're all splitting off into these VERY formidable 3rd parties with excellent presidential candidates and absolutely no hope of success.

Oh yeah, and I think that people would probably put more work into voting and finding out who what candidates they like best. It's really easy now, and that's probably what spurs on the apathy, not the other way around.

2006-09-21 09:01:54 · answer #2 · answered by dinochirus 4 · 0 1

Try this for thought if no one voted would business as usual continue in politics without any public support? In my opinion YES they would make up justification to occupy rule & control! If this took shape in this manner how much more proof would you need to have that your vote currently carries no effect! Sorry to break it to ya but the party thing now is a mute or irrrelevant issue. Why because of three controling factors Money/Power/Wealth. In fact all over the world what ever a country calls itself or describes its rule these three factors are the main reins! My vote is for no more Representative government & amend the constitution for a true Democracy Majority Rule & control for the legal citizen's.

2006-09-21 09:14:24 · answer #3 · answered by bulabate 5 · 0 0

Probably less people would vote because it would be more work for them, but it wouldn't change the way I vote now. I vote for the person who would best do the job (or at least the person who would do a better job than the other candidates, even if not the best).

2006-09-21 09:00:26 · answer #4 · answered by John J 6 · 1 1

I would go to the poll, see the name of the person I liked and pick it. Hardly anyone is voting now, I think I could be the only one to vote and thus make myself President someday.

2006-09-21 09:02:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I would vote the same. I research before I vote anyway. I lean toward Republican but for Governor I will vote Democratic.

I would vote for anyone who held my core beliefs and could show in their voting history that they were stead fast with those beliefs.

Plus anyone who has a tan-gable solution to national security and illegal immigrants would get my vote.

2006-09-21 08:57:28 · answer #6 · answered by hisgirl 5 · 2 0

if there were no political parties, we would have to vote by what is on each candidates agenda or plan. the candidate with the best strategy to put is palns in action would most likely win.

2006-09-21 09:04:08 · answer #7 · answered by Han_dang 4 · 0 0

On the specific issues they represent .Like in order to cut taxes i would like to know what area of services will be reduced .It is logical to assume that a tax cut would mean lower revenues collected if indeed it where a cut and not a deferment or debt .

2006-09-21 11:39:03 · answer #8 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0 0

People are people, political parties are just the sepparation of the diffeance of political opinions. Even if there weren't a sepparation of party, people would still vote for whom had the same opinion as them.

2006-09-21 08:55:02 · answer #9 · answered by afafae25 4 · 1 1

The same as i always do.I try to go with the most honest and the best man for the job. experience etc. No matter which party. we areall Americans i think.

2006-09-21 09:03:54 · answer #10 · answered by GEORGIA10 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers