At the moment, (and yes it could change before tomorrow) it looks like I will split my vote and vote for one party in the Presidential elections and the other for more local races. (No I'm not telling you which way I'm voting.)
Anyone else doing this?
AJ
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Most of my votes go to Republican, except for one State Senate race in which I'm voting Democratic because I have met with the man personally and have long admired his position on the issues.
I don't know if I've ever voted an entirely straight party ticket.
FG
Posted by Traveler (Member # 3615) on :
I will be voting straight party line..democrat. I can not, will not, vote for a republican right now. Nothing on that party's platform speaks to me at all.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
In my case, it wasn't an option. We recently moved into a district represented by a long-time Deomcratic incumbent who is corrupt and at least a little anti-Semetic. However, it is one of the Democratic safe districts created in the last redistricting, so the Republican incumbent had no chance of winning. Plus, I moved after the primary.
I might support some Democrats for county government, but they weren't on the ballot. I did vote for bond issues supported by the Democrat-majority Council.
Historically I've not voted many split tickets, although I would have if Ollie North's Senate run had been in a presidential election year.
Dagonee
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
I usually end up voting for the same party in presidential and legislative positions, but not as often for positions like State Auditor, where it doesn’t matter so much if I agree with their political views.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I voted a straight ticket, but I really didn't want to. The problem was that I'm voting absentee, so for most of the county positions I don't know who they are unless I get pamphlets from them. Since I registered with the democrats (I'm not a registered Democrat, but they came to our door and gave me a little card and sent it in for me and everything) all of the campaign material I get is from the democrats. There are republicans I support, but none of them were up for election this year. As it was I only voted for about half the positions.
I'm not sure how I would vote if I were voting tomorrow, the democrats have been launching a really nasty tv ad campaign recently and it's making me really angry.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
I keep hearing that frequent redistricting is becoming a significant problem at some political levels in America. Is that true?
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
My vote was split pretty much 50/50. I know a lot of the local officials and worked in their realm (I was a legal assistant, they're the DA, Clerk of Courts, etc.) for four years, so I voted for the ones I knew would do well. Their parties are different, but that doesn't really matter as long as the perform.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The redistricting makes one of my races very exciting. Two incumbents are running against each other, both have the full support of their parties, and both have been in the House for fifteen years at least. It's the most expensive House race in the country - over ten million dollars total for the campaign.
And no, I don't know who I'm voting for yet. I'd vote against the Republican just because I'm annoyed the redistricting, except for one thing: the redistricting put the porportion of "Republican" seats in line with the porportion of the state that generally votes Republican. In other words, it definitely upset the balance, but the balance is now more in line with the popular porpotion of votes. Before, the Democrats had more "safe" seats that voting habits of the state warranted. I hate the way they did it, but the Democrats weren't shanghaied.
So, I need to research. But it's possible I'll have a split ballot.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
My father is consciously splitting his ticket at the national level. Though he is a lifelong republican, he has come to the conclusion that George Bush's presidency has been a failure. So his intention for the last month or two has been to vote one party for president, and a different one for house and senate, in the hopes that neither the democrats, with whom he disagees in general, nor the republicans, whom he views as dangerous at this moment in time, has the power to do much damage.
I am not purposely doing this, but I am sort of de facto splitting my ticket--just not at the national level. I am voting for democrats in all three national-job positions, but at the local level we simply get better republican candidates, in my opinion. So in the majority of local races I am voting for republicans.
Our ammendments fall less along party lines as along doctors vs. lawyers lines. I am giving the doctors two out of three. Most of our other ammendments, aside from the minimum wage one, are special interest groups, not political parties. Which means you find some odd configurations of people supporting specific ammendments.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Voted straight GOP. Bush for president and Martinez for Senate because I support them. Republicans for other elections because I know they'll lose but I don't want the Dems to get comfortable. I did go to the left on one proposed amendment though.
Posted by dread pirate romany (Member # 6869) on :
I will be voting for Democratic candidates, but will be voting in favor of charter schools, which had been oppsed by the Democrats.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I keep hearing that frequent redistricting is becoming a significant problem at some political levels in America. Is that true?
Generally it's done every 10 years. The famous "re-redistricting" attempt this time around was Texas, in which the first time the legislature didn't pass a redistricting plan quickly enough, so someone else (either the courts or some commission) implemented one. The Republicans redistricted on the theory that the legislature hadn't done it yet this decade, so could legally do it again.
In general, though, redisticting is done to entrench incumbents. So yes, it is a problem.
Dagonee
Posted by Space Opera (Member # 6504) on :
I've never voted a straight ticket before, but I will be this year.
space opera
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Never voted for a party in my life. Always thought that voting for an issue or a person based primarily on their label -- as opposed to, say, facts or voting records -- is remarkably stupid.
Now, if you've studied your issues and your candidates and you find that the people in one party match up with your beliefs right down the ticket, go for it. The fact that you're voting the party line would then be incidental.
Still nothing to brag about, though, in my opinion. Something like bragging you always answer mathematical questions with even numbers because you've always answered even, your father always answered even, and you'll answer even 'til the day you die.
[ November 01, 2004, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
The thread wasn't intended to be bragging either way Chris, more just curiousity. And it's been a surprisingly non-controversial thread and I hope it stays that way. You are in no way obligated to say which party you voted for where...
AJ
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
My apologies, didn't intend to sound as sharp as I did.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
No harm done. AJ
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
this time around I'll be voting for all republicans, but because I prefer them to those they are running against. I have voted for democrats on a state and local level before, but never on a national level.
I'm a bit annoyed with the spending of the republican party, but even so they are a closer fit for me than the other parties (including third parties).
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
What Chris said, only with soft fluffy corners.
I'm thrilled with our Deomocrat choices for representative (Tammy Baldwin) and senator (Russ Feingold) -- both are incumbents with an excellent track record of integrity and responsiveness to their constituents. I still read up on their challengers in order to asssess thoroughly, and I confirmed for myself that I don't want those guys representing me. Easy choice.
On the presidential side, Kerry/Edwards. They are not my ideal choice by any means, but I can support their leadership with clear conscience. I can't do that with Bush/Cheney. Either result, though, I'll likely be an ex-pat by the time the next election rolls around, if things work out.
Locally, I was not pleased with some actions of our incumbent Democrat DA, Brian Blanchard, although I could live with him. He has done a good job about disregarding political power in enforcing the law (prosecuting a corrupt state legislature), and he has a sensible stance on "the war on drugs." Still, I voted for his (unlikely to win) Green challenger, Sally Stix. I would be delighted with Stix, although that won't happen -- but I want to keep Blanchard from feeling too comfortable. Were he to face serious opposition, I'd consider Stix a Nader and suck it up to Blanchard.
Hamblin, Republican incumbent, has my vote for sheriff. He, like Blanchard, is sensible on drug policy, he has more than 30 yrs in the criminal justice system, and he works well for the students, his major block. I liked his Green challenger Benedetto, but I think he needs further seasoning, and I can support Hamblin with a clear conscience.
I'll spare you the rest of the details. It's a pretty scattered mix of Green, Democrat, and some Republican. I voted right-ways on the pool referendum though (or at least, a definite non-Green) -- our kids need it, and the lakefront land is as much theirs as ours.
[ November 02, 2004, 07:32 AM: Message edited by: Sara Sasse ]
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Most of our other ammendments, aside from the minimum wage one, are special interest groups, not political parties. Which means you find some odd configurations of people supporting specific ammendments.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)