Why do you vote the way you do?

[prisonchaplain]

When I vote, issues tend to drive my decisions. In order of priority, here are my top few:

1. Religious Liberty -- As an example, a humanist group is fighting to have a war memorial torn down because it includes a cross. The memorial has been up for decades. Why tear it down? Does it hurt the beliefs of humanists? I doubt it. However, it certainly hurts the feelings of those family and loved ones who honor those fallen soldiers. I want candidates who will elect judges with respect for spiritual heritage. Likewise for Christian bakers/florists etc. No one should be forced to participate in religious/political messaging that goes against their faith.

2. Pro-life -- The Kavanaugh hearing was infuriating. Baseless allegations should never have made it to public portions of the senate. Even from a secular viewpoint babies deserve the benefit of the doubt. If we don't "know" when life begins, the presumption should be in favor of the child.

3. A distant third would be the myriad of policy positions I favor.

4. Party affiliation -- There is a party that more closely aligns with my views, and I tend to favor candidates from it. However, I will pull the other lever when a candidate shows love for religious liberty and unborn life.

5. Lesser of evils -- I had to vote for an establishment member of a party I oppose because his opponent is a full-on socialist.

I'm intentionally not naming parties or candidates, but really looking for a discussion of broader issues. So jump in! 🙂

[Guest]

Because I absolutely hate Republicans.  But I will never vote for a Democrat.

[Maureen]

36 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Because I absolutely hate Republicans.  But I will never vote for a Democrat.

So you actually hate the people who identify themselves as Republicans or you hate the Republican Party?

M.

[Guest MormonGator]

I vote for the party/candidate that I dislike the least. 

[askandanswer]

I generally need to do a lot of study and take a lot of time before I decide who I will vote for. The main issues that I take into consideration, not in any particular order are:

the policies presented by the main competing parties, what I think of the policies, whether or not I think they will be workable, how much they will cost, what impact they will have and how they sit with my personal morals and values

The past performance of the candidates, if known

The past performance of the candidates' parties.

How I feel about the leader of the parties, their past performance, their morals, values and standards, and most importantly, their reliability, credibility and trustworthiness.

How well each party manages the national finances. 

Whether or not their collection of policies amounts to some sort of coherent, semi-achievable vision, or whether its just a grab-bag of assorted policies that doesn't really fit well together. 

Increasingly, I am also beginning to give some consideration to environmental policies and practices although, as noted above, this is just one of a great many things that I take into consideration. 

What message I want to send to the political system.

However, in spite of all the above, in the last territory election, I pretty much ignored all of the above and just voted for a member of our ward who I know well. My son spent several months campaigning for her. She won and my son now works for her. I haven't decided if I will do the same again in two years time, but next time, instead of just voting for her without considering anything else, I will be giving some consideration to the above factors. 

[Midwest LDS]

Good question. Really I have 3 main priorities when I vote. I have an opinion on a myriad of issues, but these 3 positions are dealbreakers for me if a candidate disagrees with me.

1. Religious liberty. As a Latter-day Saint my right to worship God as I please, and the rights of others to do likewise, is the most important thing in my life and is the most important issue I base my vote on. I believe the loss of this right would destroy this country faster than any other.

2. Pro-life. It's really hard for me to see the opposite side of this issue. Killing babies for convenience is the greatest act of barbarism perpetrated in the United States, and I won't vote for a pro-choice candidate.

3. A strong armed forces. I've studied too much history to support anyone who wants to slash the military budget. I believe firmly in President Teddy Roosevelt's maxim "Speak softly and carry a big stick". 

Now I make an exception too these rules at the local level, because my mayor or county auditor has no power to affect these issues, so my vote is more flexible there. But in state and national elections those are "lines in the sand" for me so to speak.

 

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

2. Pro-life. It's really hard for me to see the opposite side of this issue. Killing babies for convenience is the greatest act of barbarism perpetrated in the United States, and I won't vote for a pro-choice candidate.

 Just curious, not arguing with you-do they have to be pro-life 100% of time? What if the candidate was pro-life but had reservations on rape/incest? 

Not even arguing for those exceptions, just curious as to where you stand. 

[Midwest LDS]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

 Just curious, not arguing with you-do they have to be pro-life 100% of time? What if the candidate was pro-life but had reservations on rape/incest? 

Not even arguing for those exceptions, just curious as to where you stand. 

I mean yes, in that case I would not vote for the person. I mean that those are dealbreakers for me, so I won't vote for a candidate that disagrees with me on the issues I outlined. In a situation you pointed out, where both candidates are equally objectionable, I vote for either some third party candidate, or myself as a protest vote. Basically I usually end up voting for whoever I think is the lesser of two evils anyways, but I am flexible enough to vote outside of party lines if no one meets my basic expectations☺.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

I mean yes, in that case I would not vote for the person. Basically I mean that those are dealbreakers for me, so I won't vote for a candidate that disagrees with me on that issue. In a situation you pointed out, where both candidates are equally objectionable, I vote for eother some third party candidate, or myself as a protest vote. Basically I usually end up voting for whoever I think is the lesser of two evils anyways, but I am flexible enough to vote outside of part lines if no one meets my basic expectations☺.

I know a ton of people who have "non compromise" issues. Gun rights, gay marriage, abortion, religious liberty, you name it. I always like hearing the reasons. 
 

[Midwest LDS]

14 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I know a ton of people who have "non compromise" issues. Gun rights, gay marriage, abortion, religious liberty, you name it. I always like hearing the reasons. 
 

Agreed, I like talking about politics in a non contentious way. I have friends and family across the political spectrum. Admittedly that has been difficult recently, which is frustrating because election season is my playoff season and I love talking about it. But too often it ends in an argument, so I've held off most of the time (at least since 2016).

Edited November 4, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Agreed, I like talking about politics in a non contentious way. I have friends and family across the political spectrum. Admittedly that has been difficult recently, which is frustrating because election season is my plaoff season and I love talking about it. But too often it ends in an argument, so I've held off most of the time (at least since 2016).

I've been a political junkie for years. I'm blessed to have a close friend who is left wing and a close friend who is right wing. We talk about politics all the time. 

[Midwest LDS]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I've been a political junkie for years. I'm blessed to have a close friend who is left wing and a close friend who is right wing. We talk about politics all the time. 

Me too. Even when I was very young (I would have been 7) I remember discussing politics with my mom, and trying to get her to vote for George H.W. Bush instead of Perot. I also remember staying up late to see if Dole could upset Clinton, and being ecstatic when George W. Bush won in 2000. It's definitly been a source for a lot of fun discussions in my life.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[JohnsonJones]

Hmm, I don't think I have a specific order of topics that I look at.  Party affiliation normally has no effect on what I choose specifically, but I do not lean Republican. 

I dislike the very uncharitable and hateful way the Republican party has become towards others.  The want to create debtor prisons (prisons where prisoners must pay their way and sometimes if they can't, they remain in prison because they cannot pay off the debt of being held there), they want to do away with social benefits (whether one calls it welfare, social security, or other things) and weaken these benefits (how many times have I heard about making SS worse for older citizens).  They are very tyrannical in my view regarding charity and helping one's neighbors.

On the otherhand, I dislike the immorality that the Democrats espouse at times.  Pushing the agenda that one must speak and act a certain way as per LGBT rights regardless of what your religious belief or faith may dictate, the desire to expand what abortion was originally ruled legally for and the actions which have promoted immorality (such as intimacy before marriage) and continue to do so are also very distasteful to me.  They are better with charity, but very horrendous in regards to retaining certain moralities.

I look at what the candidate has done and how they act.  What have they done in accordance with what I think is moral or charitable or Christlike.  I suppose in that view religion is at the very heart of my choices...but unlike many I do not see that the Republican are necessarily working on the side of my beliefs or religious feelings either.  In many instances it has turned out to be more of a choice of the lesser evils rather than a choice of who is the better candidate.

As an aside to above...I did like Perot when he ran.  I also liked Bernie Sanders.  Weird tastes on my part I suppose.

[Guest MormonGator]

5 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

The want to create debtor prisons (prisons where prisoners must pay their way and sometimes if they can't, they remain in prison because they cannot pay off the debt of being held there)

We all know what debtor prisons are, and no republican wants to create them. 

[askandanswer]

12 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I dislike the very uncharitable and hateful way the Republican party has become towards others.  they want to do away with social benefits (whether one calls it welfare, social security, or other things) and weaken these benefits (how many times have I heard about making SS worse for older citizens).  They are very tyrannical in my view regarding charity and helping one's neighbors.

On the otherhand, I dislike the immorality that the Democrats espouse at times.  Pushing the agenda that one must speak and act a certain way as per LGBT rights regardless of what your religious belief or faith may dictate, the desire to expand what abortion was originally ruled legally for and the actions which have promoted immorality (such as intimacy before marriage) and continue to do so are also very distasteful to me.  They are better with charity, but very horrendous in regards to retaining certain moralities.

I'm surprised at how well the above describes some of the distinguishing features between the Liberal and Labor parties in Australia.

[JohnsonJones]

Just now, MormonGator said:

We all know what debtor prisons are, and no republican wants to create them. 

justice system steeps many offenders in debt

Will you be paying cash or credit

Quote

Judges in several states have sent former inmates back to prison for failure to appear at court hearings related to their debt, a practice critics say is akin to modern-day debtor’s prison. A 2012 report by the Brennan Center found that in 2009, Mecklenburg County, N.C., sent 246 people back to prison because they fell behind on their debts. The county was able to collect $33,476, but the incarcerations cost nearly $40,000, leaving taxpayers in the red. Missouri allows people to voluntarily go back behind bars to “pay off” debts. Circuit judges have the power, at the defendant’s request, to commute fines and fees in return for more jail time, where the inmate is credited $10 per day.

North Carolina Jail Fees

brennan center page

Quote

Is Charging Inmates to Stay in Prison Smart Policy?

 

The American criminal justice system is replete with fees that attempt to shift costs from the government to those accused and convicted of breaking the law. Courts impose monetary sanctions on a substantial majority of the millions of U.S. residents convicted of felony and misdemeanor crimes. There are an estimated 10 million people who owe more than $50 billion resulting from their involvement in the criminal justice system.

In the last few decades, fees have proliferated, such as charges for police transport, case filing, felony surcharges, electronic monitoring, drug testing, and sex offender registration. Unlike fines, whose purpose is to punish, and restitution, which is intended to compensate crime victims, user fees are intended to raise revenue. This map details which statutes authorize state and county correctional facilities to charge inmates for their cost of incarceration as well as charge inmates for medical fees while incarcerated.

Something that mentions Florida, though the writer is longer winded than I am

https://truthout.org/articles/fighting-the-fees-that-force-prisoners-to-pay-for-their-incarceration/

Quote

his past January, prisoners in Florida went on strike to protest what they called modern-day slavery in the state’s prisons. As of March, not only had the Florida Department of Corrections not responded to the demand for paid labor and improved living conditions, it had also placed some of the prisoners who were demanding fair wages into solitary confinement. As Heather Ann Thompson, author of Blood in the Water: The Attica Prison Uprising of 1971 and Its Legacy succinctly said on Democracy Now!, “If you do not treat people as human beings they will eventually erupt.” The fight is far from over.

Florida is one of five states where prisoners receive no money for their work, forcing families to cough up money for food and necessities. Florida is also one of 43 states that charge prisoners for their so-called “stay” behind bars, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. This egregious injustice disproportionately targets African Americans, who fill a third of Florida’s prisons, although they only make up 17 percent of the state’s overall population.

While the movement to end money bail has gained steam across the nation, the burgeoning fight against the exorbitant “pay-to-stay” fees charged by prisons and jails has yet to enter the public eye in the same way.

I note that typically it seems more a thing that is pushed by Republicans in general then Democrats (and many of the pages and groups fighting against this practice would be labeled as liberal or ultra liberal).

My solution is to first...arrest LESS people.  Secondly, try to rehabilitate rather than punish.  But hey...I'm more liberal than many.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, JohnsonJones said:

 the writer is longer winded than I am

Not possible. 

[prisonchaplain]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

 Just curious, not arguing with you-do they have to be pro-life 100% of time? What if the candidate was pro-life but had reservations on rape/incest? 

Not even arguing for those exceptions, just curious as to where you stand. 

Since I also listed pro-life, I'll confess that I would compromise on this and vote for a candidate who allowed for the exceptions. Doing so protects most unborn babies. We could then focus on winning the hearts and minds of a society that right now approves of late-term abortions.

[Guest MormonGator]

I think you need to compromise in politics. You'll never, ever find a candidate who agrees with you 100% of the time. 

[prisonchaplain]

24 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

justice system steeps many offenders in debt

Will you be paying cash or credit

North Carolina Jail Fees

brennan center page

Something that mentions Florida, though the writer is longer winded than I am

https://truthout.org/articles/fighting-the-fees-that-force-prisoners-to-pay-for-their-incarceration/

I note that typically it seems more a thing that is pushed by Republicans in general then Democrats (and many of the pages and groups fighting against this practice would be labeled as liberal or ultra liberal).

My solution is to first...arrest LESS people.  Secondly, try to rehabilitate rather than punish.  But hey...I'm more liberal than many.

I read the first post and thought, "What on earth?" Yet, very few would post such allegations without something concrete in mind. Sure enough, there are some sporadic cases. And...Republicans being the "law and order" type would be more likely to support such causes. Debtor prisons are a horrific idea, and I don't particularly appreciate private ones either. That said, neither are "bread and butter" for most Republicans. The party would do well to off-load such peripheral cruelty, though.

[prisonchaplain]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

I think you need to compromise in politics. You'll never, ever find a candidate who agrees with you 100% of the time. 

True enough, but we don't have to like this reality.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, prisonchaplain said:

True enough, but we don't have to like this reality.

Reality is a harsh mistress who doesn't care about your personal views. It's tough, but it's something we should accept. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, askandanswer said:

I generally need to do a lot of study and take a lot of time before I decide who I will vote for. The main issues that I take into consideration, not in any particular order are:

the policies presented by the main competing parties, what I think of the policies, whether or not I think they will be workable, how much they will cost, what impact they will have and how they sit with my personal morals and values

The past performance of the candidates, if known

The past performance of the candidates' parties.

How I feel about the leader of the parties, their past performance, their morals, values and standards, and most importantly, their reliability, credibility and trustworthiness.

How well each party manages the national finances. 

Whether or not their collection of policies amounts to some sort of coherent, semi-achievable vision, or whether its just a grab-bag of assorted policies that doesn't really fit well together. 

Increasingly, I am also beginning to give some consideration to environmental policies and practices although, as noted above, this is just one of a great many things that I take into consideration. 

What message I want to send to the political system.

However, in spite of all the above, in the last territory election, I pretty much ignored all of the above and just voted for a member of our ward who I know well. My son spent several months campaigning for her. She won and my son now works for her. I haven't decided if I will do the same again in two years time, but next time, instead of just voting for her without considering anything else, I will be giving some consideration to the above factors. 

You're from Australia.  I don't see how going through any sort of effort in researching candidates results in any dividends.

[Sunday21]

I look at a number of different factors.

1 I think one of the lessons of the Book of Mormon is that moral character matters. If we are led by psychopaths, liars, and swindlers,  we may be affluent in the short term but disaster is coming.

2. The economy is fragile. A fragile economy can collapse. One of the greatest tragedies of modern life is unemployment and lack of opportunity for young people. Drastic action either by removing or increasing government involvement in the economy is risky. Uncertainty tends to lead delayed business decisions and lack of investment and thus unemployment.

3. Politicians need to work together within the country and across countries. If a politician assumes that those from other political views are evil, they will not be able to work with other parties or countries, once elected. 

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Sunday21

[Jane_Doe]

I want someone who's got a decent moral character, a decent track record of doing what they say they will, and (hopefully) similar view on at least a few issues as me.   

^That's a wish list that never comes true.  So, the best I can get.  

The issues a care the most about are: environmental stewardship, finical stewardship, and just generally being responsible-- if you want a program, how do you intend to pay for it?