• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you always vote party line for President or must candidates earn your vote? (1 Viewer)

Do you always vote party line for President or must candidates earn your vote?

  • Yes. I have voted against my party's candidate.

    Votes: 16 32.0%

  • Yes. I would be open to voting against my party's candidate.

    Votes: 20 40.0%

  • No. I have never voted against my party's candidate.

    Votes: 6 12.0%

  • No. I would not consider voting against my party's candidate.

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • If I don't like my party's candidate, I'll switch parties first.

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • I could not see myself voting for the opposition but I could not vote on election day.

    Votes: 5 10.0%

  • Other.

    Votes: 18 36.0%
  • Total voters
    50
Smeagol

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This question strikes at the core of a political theory I've had for a while: Independent voters choose the leader of the free world. The political landscape is pretty much evenly divided with a slight leaning for the democrats. And then only in a handful of swing states: Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida; sometimes a couple of extras. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent every four years to try to persuade a very small group to vote for them because the vast majority of people reliably vote for the nominee of their own party. The republicans especially have historically created significant pressure to "keep the team together." There's a political slur with which republicans get labeled if they choose to think for themselves and dare to support a candidate of another party. Speaker Paul Ryan is now being threatened with loss of his position as Speaker of The House if he fails to endorse Donald Trump.

IMHO, the American political culture is a major "group think" society. The political information media is primarily designed to affirm the parties' positions and values to the masses. Right and wrong is often defined by to which political party do the principals belong. Our guy does something questionable and its "lets not rush to judgment" or its a "politically motivated witch-hunt." Their guy does something questionable and we gloat adding the suffix "gate" to the end of its title in order to augment its scandalous characteristic in public discourse. Meanwhile, the small group that breaks the tie and has the power to be king-makers are those who won't let their respective "Big Brothers" control their thinking nor their vote.

Do you vote party line or do you have/would you ever consider voting against your own party?
 
Smeagol said:
This question strikes at the core of a political theory I've had for a while: Independent voters choose the leader of the free world. The political landscape is pretty much evenly divided with a slight leaning for the democrats. And then only in a handful of swing states: Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida; sometimes a couple of extras. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent every four years to try to persuade a very small group to vote for them because the vast majority of people reliably vote for the nominee of their own party. The republicans especially have historically created significant pressure to "keep the team together." There's a political slur with which republicans get labeled if they choose to think for themselves and dare to support a candidate of another party. Speaker Paul Ryan is now being threatened with loss of his position as Speaker of The House if he fails to endorse Donald Trump.

IMHO, the American political culture is a major "group think" society. The political information media is primarily designed to affirm the parties' positions and values to the masses. Right and wrong is often defined by to which political party do the principals belong. Our guy does something questionable and its "lets not rush to judgment" or its a "politically motivated witch-hunt." Their guy does something questionable and we gloat adding the suffix "gate" to the end of its title in order to augment its scandalous characteristic in public discourse. Meanwhile, the small group that breaks the tie and has the power to be king-makers are those who won't let their respective "Big Brothers" control their thinking nor their vote.

Do you vote party line or do you have/would you ever consider voting against your own party?
Click to expand...
Since I have no Party line it is no concern of mine. But it is an excellent question to ask this election because one Party is about to run someone as their candidate that does not stand for anything their Party stands for, will they vote for their Party no matter what or will they not vote or even vote for the other candidate? If any election ever will identify which voters will stand by their principles and which will stand by their Party no matter if their candidate does not stand for those principles this is it.
 
I have never considered myself a member of any party. Doesn't mean I don't have a strong ideological identity. Rather, I don't want to get attached to any party because of the strong ideological identity I don't want to compromise. The Vichy Republicans now coalescing around the ideologically alien Trump is an excellent illustration.
 
Smeagol said:
This question strikes at the core of a political theory I've had for a while: Independent voters choose the leader of the free world. The political landscape is pretty much evenly divided with a slight leaning for the democrats. And then only in a handful of swing states: Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida; sometimes a couple of extras. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent every four years to try to persuade a very small group to vote for them because the vast majority of people reliably vote for the nominee of their own party. The republicans especially have historically created significant pressure to "keep the team together." There's a political slur with which republicans get labeled if they choose to think for themselves and dare to support a candidate of another party. Speaker Paul Ryan is now being threatened with loss of his position as Speaker of The House if he fails to endorse Donald Trump.

IMHO, the American political culture is a major "group think" society. The political information media is primarily designed to affirm the parties' positions and values to the masses. Right and wrong is often defined by to which political party do the principals belong. Our guy does something questionable and its "lets not rush to judgment" or its a "politically motivated witch-hunt." Their guy does something questionable and we gloat adding the suffix "gate" to the end of its title in order to augment its scandalous characteristic in public discourse. Meanwhile, the small group that breaks the tie and has the power to be king-makers are those who won't let their respective "Big Brothers" control their thinking nor their vote.

Do you vote party line or do you have/would you ever consider voting against your own party?
Click to expand...
I am no longer a party person, but I used to be back in my younger days, so I will answer with my younger mindset in mind.

Even when I was solidly of a party, candidates still had to earn my vote... or, at least not drive me away. I didn't vote for the other primary party often, but it wasn't unheard of, either. To me, to vote straight party line all the time* is lazy and and naive and irresponsible. At that point you're not even trying to get the best result, you're only interested in pushing your desired agenda.

*- Some individual elections can end up that way, sure.
 
I don't think I have ever voted straight party line, but rather cast my vote depending on what the individual candidate had to offer. Don't take my vote for granted, ever.
 
Normally I just spin the Wheel of Misfortune. Too many of my votes have been cast as preventive rather than positive, so I really can't view it any other way.
 
In terms of the 2016 election, I can guarantee I will not vote for my party's nominee (Trump). I will also note vote for Clinton by the way.

The only other time I did NOT vote for the GOP candidate was when I voted for Ross Perot. I did come to regret that.
 
I don't belong to a party. A candidate must earn my vote. I voted Green party in the last election but voted in the Democratic primaries this time around so I could vote for Bernie. If the nominee is Hillary then I will likely vote Green again. But I don't vote straight ticket. In the local political races I vote for Greens, Libertarians, and some Democrats. I haven't voted Republican since GWB's first presidential run. I find it next to impossible to imagine a modern day Republican I would vote for. But I could be surprised.
 
This gets pretty tricky for a nonpartisan independent.
When I was a party goer, I still considered other candidates and voted against the party once (which is actually when I went independent).
To me, voting strictly to party line is blindly following and this scares me.
 
I voted "other".

I refuse to be a member of either "party".

They both suck beyond the pale.
 
Before this election I was planning on it, as this year I will be able to vote for the first time. But this election has really opened my eyes to how corrupt both the Democrats and the Republicans are, so I've chosen to align with neither political party.
 
I have little use for either party. Nothing would please me more than to have both ruling parties collapse as the GOP is doing now. I suspect and hope that if Hillary (and her husband) is nominated for candidate of the Democratic Party there will be a large and everlasting split. Many Sanders supporters that I know refuse to vote for Hillary, and with good reason. Screw the Democrat and Republican establishment corpgov parties.

If Sanders isn't the Democratic nominee I'll either write his name in or vote Green.

I am an Independent who recently registered Green so that I can help keep the Green Party on the ballot in Arizona. The Tea Party has a death grip on Arizona government. Our governor is a Kock lapdog. Our governor follows ALIC and supports whatever laws ALIC writes for state governor toadies. Arizona's Governor Doucey is working overtime to become a Brownback clone.

I'll be damned if I want more of that heavy handed top down big government in the name of small government, especially at the federal level. I know how it looks at the state level and it's ugly. That is the GOP.

Democrats under Hillary and Wasserman Schultz "leadership" is just more of the same with a different taste. Hillary has never really accomplished much of anything for Americans. She's no champion of the People. Her record is there to see. Washerman Schultz is despicable. Imagine having that woman in a Cabinet position. It'll happen if Hillary wins. Many Democrats don't like the way the party is being whored up and manhandled. I suspect that many will tell Hillary to kiss it on election day.
 
tres borrachos said:
In terms of the 2016 election, I can guarantee I will not vote for my party's nominee (Trump). I will also note vote for Clinton by the way.

The only other time I did NOT vote for the GOP candidate was when I voted for Ross Perot. I did come to regret that.
Click to expand...

Good morning, tres borrachos. :2wave:

I also voted for Perot, and as history has shown us, he was absolutely correct about NAFTA, and the direction this country has taken since! I don't regret my vote for Perot, but the outcome of that vote. With Trump running now, will history repeat, and we'll have another Clinton in office? Many seem to feel that is the reason Trump decided to run this year, once again splitting the GOP vote. Both Trump and Perot are billionaire businessmen, so the corollary does make me wonder... :shock:
 
polgara said:
Good morning, tres borrachos. :2wave:

I also voted for Perot, and as history has shown us, he was absolutely correct about NAFTA, and the direction this country has taken since! I don't regret my vote for Perot, but the outcome of that vote. With Trump running now, will history repeat, and we'll have another Clinton in office? Many seem to feel that is the reason Trump decided to run this year, once again splitting the GOP vote. Both Trump and Perot are billionaires, so the corollary does make me wonder... :shock:
Click to expand...
But this isn't just another Clinton. This is Hillary Clinton we're talking about here. She'd be 100x worse than Bill Clinton ever would be.

Along with the fact that she is the fakest person ever.
 
TheGoverness said:
But this isn't just another Clinton. This is Hillary Clinton we're talking about here. She'd be 100x worse than Bill Clinton ever would be.

Along with the fact that she is the fakest person ever.
Click to expand...

Greetings, TheGoverness. :2wave:

:thumbs: Can you imagine the ridicule the GOP would face from the Dems if they had Hillary as their candidate? I sure can! I have to admire Sanders' tenacity in continuing to fight, when the deck is so blatantly stacked against him - she had hundreds of delegates before the first primary/caucus ever took place? Unbelievable! No wonder the public is angry and disgusted with the status quo in both parties, and are showing it in their votes! Party leaders on both sides had better pay attention, IMO, because their crookedness has been exposed for all to see...
 
polgara said:
Greetings, TheGoverness. :2wave:

:thumbs: Can you imagine the ridicule the GOP would face from the Dems if they had Hillary as their candidate? I sure can! I have to admire Sanders' tenacity in continuing to fight, when the deck is so blatantly stacked against him - she had hundreds of delegates before the first primary/caucus ever took place? Unbelievable! No wonder the public is angry and disgusted with the status quo in both parties, and are showing it in their votes! Party leaders on both sides had better pay attention, IMO, because their crookedness has been exposed for all to see...
Click to expand...

Yeah, the DNC and the GOP are both corrupt as ****. I'm glad most people are beginning to realise how truly bought and sold our political system is in the US.
 
Years ago, we had a gubernatorial election in which the Democratic candidate ran a campaign based on "getting tough on crime," which is just code for increased incarceration, particularly of blacks and browns.

He lost my vote with that. It was the only time I've ever voted third-party for a major political office. Oh, and he lost the election in a landslide.
 
TheGoverness said:
But this isn't just another Clinton. This is Hillary Clinton we're talking about here. She'd be 100x worse than Bill Clinton ever would be.

Along with the fact that she is the fakest person ever.
Click to expand...

:lamo
 
I have voted for different party candidates many times over the years... for Obama in his first term and against him in the second. I voted for Obama and against the Republicans the first time around and voted against Obama the second time because I can be fooled once but never twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom