Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Monday, November 1. 2010

A re-post: Why I vote for the party, not the person, in national elections

Most of the time, anyway. I did vote for Lieberman running as an Independent, rightly or wrongly, because the Repub did not have a chance and I did not care for the Dem.


For national elections, I vote Party most all the time. Why? Because when they get to Washington they cease to be individuals, and become captive of their party caucuses. That's the way it works.


Whether smart or dumb, free-thinking or robots, they have to play the game if they want to get anywhere. The leaders call the plays. 


Thus, in the end, you are voting for a vote in Congress, not for a person. In primaries, I vote for my preferred candidate, but in national elections I vote Repub only because their caucus is more Conservative than any alternatives.


Voting for "who you like better" is childishly naive and foolish in the extreme. You aren't voting for who you want as a social acquaintance. 


If you vote for a Dem, no matter how much you may personally prefer the guy or gal as a social companion, all you are really doing is to put another vote in the Left's pocket. Parties vote as herds, in Congress. That's why they have people called "Whips."


A vote for a Dem is a vote for the current Obama agenda. If you like the Dem approach to life, by all means vote for whomever they are running.


Otherwise, don't.

Posted by The Barrister in Our Essays, Politics at 10:36 | Comments (23) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Naive and foolish?

Ugh. I would say the opposite.

You vote for the person so you can get a Ron Paul in there who stays the course.

You vote for the person so you can get a Heath Shuler to stand up to his party officials.

"Faith", is doing the right thing, even when, or especially when, it looks naive and foolish. And for those of us from the Christian tradition (like most of the US Founding Fathers) we recognize that it's impossible to please God without faith.
#1 DrTorch on 2010-10-13 14:58 (Reply)
Not sure about Ron Paul, but I don't think Heath Shuler has done much standing up. Didn't he tote the Pelosi line for the most part? Is he one of those Blue "lap" Dog Democrats?
#1.1 gtrant1863 on 2010-10-13 17:36 (Reply)
This is an empirical knowledge problem, a problem in the philosophy of action.

Voting the party and not the person is the only rational action.

You know next to nothing about the person other than party affiliation. The campaign consists of lies from the candidate's people that favor him and lies from the opponent's people attacking him.

There is no way to determine the truth of any campaign statement.

But party affiliation is easily determined, and it tells a person's basic tendencies. Of course, there are still RINOs and DINOs, but they have track records.
#2 bob sykes on 2010-10-13 17:40 (Reply)
I am registered independent - which doesn't mean I'm part of the squishy middle, I assure you (it's as much a "protest" against the stupidity the Republican Party seems to be so good at).

I have tried looking into Demoncrat candidates and I never agree with them. I can't remember preferring any over the Pubbie. If the Pubbie gets in, he'll vote for another Pubbie to be Speaker of the House or Majority Leader of the Senate. They may not always do the job I would like but they will always do the job I prefer.

For me the choice is pretty simple. I do not want RINOs in office, but for the last two years, I'd rather have RINOs running things than what we have now.
#3 mudbug on 2010-10-13 18:03 (Reply)
Pretty much agree with yall, Barrister.

But i'd never vote for schmuck like Lieberman.
#4 Leag on 2010-10-13 18:10 (Reply)
The only reason I'm willing to stand in line on election day is to vote against the vermin who populate the democrat party.

Any vote for any democrat at any level empowers the democrat party. The democrat party is this country's most dangerous and tireless enemy.
#5 ccoffer on 2010-10-13 18:44 (Reply)
Here in Illinois there is no party "registration" as such for primary elections. You show up and ask for whatever ballot you want. You can only vote the one ballot, but nobody looks your name up and says "You're a Republican, you get the Republican ballot". So in 2008 I asked for the Democratic ballot. All the Republican races were one-person non-competitive races, but on the Democrat side there were some choices. Of course, the election judge knew me and almost fell out of her chair, but when I explained the above she conceded I had a point.
#6 RonF on 2010-10-14 11:29 (Reply)
I have come to the same conclusion. If I were to vote for the greatest Democrat, it still gets me Pelosi and Reid. No Pelosi, no Reid, no ObamaCare. All this hooie we were taught about voting for the person turns out to be jus tthat:hooie.
#7 Rick Caird on 2010-10-15 18:03 (Reply)
I agree -- the best candidate in the primary, but the Republican in the general.
#8 Texan99 (Link) on 2010-10-15 19:07 (Reply)
The last two years really proved that the "Blue Dogs" are a joke. A few would split off from their party - but never enough to make difference.
#9 NJSoldier on 2010-11-01 11:29 (Reply)
They vote party in the Mother Country, not personalities. It's Tory or Labour, or Liberal Democrats, the far left of the Labour Party. You don't hear about Independents in Britain like you do here in the States.

In Britain, the party has total control in the House of Commons. This leaves a paper trail and accountability. When the PM's position becomes weak, he is replaced as party leader and, ipso facto, as PM.

PM's Questions keep the government on it's toes and publicly accountable on a weekly basis. We should look for ways to have Congress become more of an open debating chamber than it is now. Wouldn't you like to see the Pres on the hot seat like Tony Blair and David Cameron?

Since the Pres is also Head of State, it is thought to be beneath the dignity of the office. Baloney, I say. I suppose it would need to be the Speaker and Majority Leader vs the Minority Leader in each body.

If we had the Brit system now in the States, the O might not survive in the Democrat caucus. The long knives would be out, and understandably so since he led them down the road to disaster at the polls. There will be some kind of revolt brewing starting on Wednesday.
#10 greenmtnpunter on 2010-11-01 11:31 (Reply)
The performance of the Blue Dog Democrats in Congress supports the "vote the party" theory. Once in office from 2007 on, the Blue Dog Democrats pretty much toed the Pelosi line, a voting record which in most instances went against the wishes of their Districts. Which is why many are going to be retired come January, either voluntarily or involuntarily.
#11 Gringo on 2010-11-01 12:12 (Reply)
My position is similar to mudbug's except that I used to call myself a "moderate," and I have voted for Democrats who I perceived "moderate" in the past (and I'm sad to say, that it was a learning experience for me). That has changed in recent years, though. Ever since 2005, it was clear to me what the Democrats stood for, and I knew that I couldn't stomach voting for any of them for anymore. Especially in the age of Obama, anyone who votes for a Democrat for House or Senate is implicitly endorsing the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda.
#12 Kurt on 2010-11-01 12:13 (Reply)
Any party that picks Nancy Lugosi (in Michael Savage speak) as Speaker should be opposed in the fields, the highways, hedgerows, barricades,etc. Voting for any Democrat is akin to eating a cyanide tablet.
#13 bill on 2010-11-01 12:28 (Reply)
But so label Nancy as "Nancy Lugosi" is to defame Hungarians! Are you a Magyar-phobe?
#13.1 Gringo on 2010-11-01 15:13 (Reply)
One thing is certain, a vote for either party is a vote for the interests of the central government. Only a matter of degree. It's all a matter of interests, power and short term, election cycle thinking. These people are scum. From a life long Republican.
#14 Tom C on 2010-11-01 13:07 (Reply)
I think you just identified one of the major problems with our government today - at least in the House.

We don't have representatives anymore.

We send them to Congress to represent us at the local level. Not represent the national parties or their national agendas.

It seems to me we are now ruled by parties.

I thought we were supposed to rule ourselves through our Reps....I guess I am just naive and foolish.
#15 Wayne on 2010-11-01 13:09 (Reply)
Hmm. I don't think its a good idea to vote for someone just because his opponent doesn't stand a chance.

Even if you support a losing candidate, you are still letting your voice be heard. If you vote for someone you don't agree with, you lend them your tacit support.
#16 Sean G on 2010-11-01 13:34 (Reply)
I'm paying them to the understand the issues and make good decisions as my representative.
Most of the time ideology is not involved.
I'm most interested in having someone in that seat who can look at proposed legislation and understand the effects and side effects it will have.
CPSIA is an example of what kind of law gets passed when people who are stupid, ideologically blinded, or apathetic get placed in the seats.
#17 Douglas2 on 2010-11-01 14:07 (Reply)
That is overly credulous.
Once in DC, they follow their leaders. They really have no choice for independent thinking.
#17.1 bd on 2010-11-01 15:02 (Reply)
The Barrister has it EXACTLY right. Parties were not forseen early in the Republic but were very, very soon on the scene.

They are absolutely necessary. for one or two or even a score of voices contrary to the general limned outline platform are going to be wholly non productive and simply a focal point for unthinking, transient, popular rage.

We definitiely do not want a multi party sytem for in every country that has tried that approach it has failed the people and the entire state suffers a larger burden than we do today.

Sometimes you have to hold your nose but that's a damn sight better than having your opponents ass thrust down your throat, and being told to enjoy it.
#18 Habu on 2010-11-01 14:22 (Reply)
It hasn't changed in 150 years,

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=49331
#19 John on 2010-11-01 15:18 (Reply)
Hungarians? George Soros?

Regarding parties. Yup! DC appears to corrupt them every time.

If the GOP doesn't get it right this time, I am with Glenn Beck - bye bye GOP. Your core will shrink to nearly nothing and you WILL be replaced. Political parties are not forever. Taxes on the other hand appear to be....
#20 Rob on 2010-11-02 16:19 (Reply)
BeckIdiots could be yall's handle or perhaps, yall could be party of harlots of shill or perhaps ShillAlots Party.

Can't figure why anyone would ride tail on a wannabe Mormon but it is a free world.
#21 Leag on 2010-11-04 10:15 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.