Elections...They really are the manifestation of the people's will or at least the manifestation of who has a good political slogan.
With every election there is the decision you all have to make as you fill out your mail in ballot (I'll rant about that another day). The question is, who gets your vote? do you stick with the incumbent? Do you go out on a limb for the challenger? Is it a case of it being better to keep the devil you know or to get the one you don't?
For example:
I personally like Congressman Reichert. I respect him in many ways but I feel that some of his votes in the last couple of years are completely against all that a member of his party stands for. I feel that there are other candidates in the primary who are more in line with my personal beliefs than the Congressman. But in all honesty they have little chance of winning. So do I cast a vote on principle or do I vote for the guy most likely to win and hope that he changes his stance of things?
As far as the races where there is no incumbent you are faced with a similar situation. You can read the candidates statements, read their mailing pieces, talk to people who know them but you really are left with a bit of a leap of faith.
So what do you do? For me I talk to people that know the candidates and people whom I trust. I have a few key people I run my choices by and who offer me their opinions and thoughts. Also read all you can about them. Your biggest ally is information. Devour it and it will quite often make the choice clear for you.
I will get my list of choices together for the primary election and post them up this week. Hopefully we can all help each other out.
So what do you do to choose?
I'm embarassed to admit that in the first several years that I was able to vote I based a lot of my decisions on whose sign I had seen the most, or whose name I liked the best. I initially had no idea that there were voter information pamphlets available, and when I finally learned that these guides existed, I couldn't make sense of the 'summarize your platform in a paragraph' for most of the candidates.
ReplyDeleteI'd much prefer a candidate who speaks plainly so that there is no room for interpretation and spin to any amount of well educated candidates who wobble with every political breeze that comes along.
For the first time in my memory, the Seattle Times has endorsed both candidates for a position. The Seattle Times endorsed Patty Murray and Dino Rossi. I know that this is the primary and they are choosing one for each party, but as I read the editorial, I realize that the Seattle Times is actually saying neither candidate is acceptable. The endorsement ends with “…If Murray is to be this state’s senator for the next six years, she needs to be a somewhat different kind of senator – a more frugal one, more willing to say “no.” Given her constituency and her party, this will be difficult. If Rossi is to be this state’s senator, he needs to break free of the militarized foreign policy inherited from the Bush administration. Given his constituency and his party, this will also be difficult.” As a reader, I’m left with the feeling that both are inadequate. While I have a different reason for not standing firmly behind Rossi, the sentiment and my conclusion are the same. I’m not willing to choose the lesser of two evils anymore because our country needs better than that to continue as the light of the world. I think my time and money will be better spent finding and supporting candidates that represent the best of my beliefs, wherever I can find them in the country. Right now, the best way to support Washington State is by having stronger leadership outside of Washington State.
ReplyDeleteNow I’m going to get another cup of coffee and read Dilbert…
I am now even a little more unsure about Rossi if the Times is endorsing him.
ReplyDeleteI like to talk to the candidates but I find that even when they talk about their positions they don't live up to all their promises or positions. I find it exceedingly difficult to trust any of them when they will say or do anything to get elected. They use old quotes to make it seem like they are endorsed by other officials, they don't reveal their true agenda, they will do all they can to ignore and avoid anyone who disagrees with their opinion and they disregard the will of the people.
ReplyDeleteI so we should start term limits for all offices. 1 term per office. No more incumbents, no more senators serving for 50 years and no more small town power grabbing councils.
People won't agree 100% of the time with the candidates they choose. Some people say, "I vote for the best qualified person regardless of party." That is naive. Pick a party that has your values, support it and stick with it because the party is going to keep that candidate in line behind the scenes. If the candidate goes outside the lines of that party, then they are moving away from the party...and your values. Pick a new candidate based on your values. Or, stick with the candidate you voted for in the past, knowing they have a better chance of winning the race and doing 95% of what you want them to.
ReplyDeleteSo the problem I have is the Party does not stick to it beliefs. I consider myself a Republican. But when the Republicans support a candidate who increases the size of government, what am I to do? When the party supports someone who raises taxes, what am I to do? When the party continues to support whoever has the best chance to win rather than putting their support behind the candidate who best fits their ideals, what am I to do?
ReplyDeleteI can not trust my party to keep the candidates in line so I am left to wander the political landscape in search of the candidate with "it." The candidate with the ideals I support, the personal fortitude to win the election, and the strength to fight against the other candidates and their own party and continue to victory.
This is exceedingly rare. But this is what we need... Oh how I long for the days of Washington...
If I were to pick a party that is closest to my ideals, I would have to pick the Constitution Party - when was the last time a candidate from that party was in office at any level?
ReplyDelete(changing the topic) speaking of elections & choices.....why are we being asked to raise our property tax (again) to fund education? The hard part is how can I say no to funding education??? But everytime we say yes to this, the government knows they can make further cuts to schools and have the school districts get the money from us. Grrr...
ReplyDeleteGood question! Does anybody know if we can request an audit of where the monies collected for various purposes actually went under the freedom of information act?
ReplyDeleteI'd love to find out just how much of the taxes collected in the name of education actually go to fund education versus other junk.
I agree! I just voted yes on two (or was it three?) school levies 6 months ago - wasn't it a special vote in February? I feel like such a sucker! Here's my contribution: hey school district, want more money? Reduce your adminstrator to teacher ratio and get rid of the teacher's union. I wish we could vote on charter schools instead. Hey, Thomas, I think we have a new post...
ReplyDeleteJill
I want to go back to Bart's original question that started this post: what criteria do we look for when selecting a candidate in November?
ReplyDeleteHere's my criteria: I'm looking for a candidate that openly talks about cutting popular entitlement programs and other waste. I want someone who believes the private sector should have the money and let the market right itself to get us out of this recession. Any candidate that starts making excuses about why government needs to keep spending and taxes need to be raised in this economy is automatically out. Any candidate that talks about the rich being able to afford to pay more and having an obligation to pay more is automatically out. Don't fall for class warfare, tax increases (as we've seen at the federal level) won't stop at the "rich"
Doug
Hey Thomas,
ReplyDeletewith this all mail balloting crap, will King County be able to determine the top two winners in each race before ballots are printed for the general election?
I like voting and getting the results same day - occasionally if it was a tight race, you might have to wait until the next morning. Now you can vote 2-3 weeks before the election day and not get the results until months after the election day. This is crap.