Third Party & Independents: Archives

The two questions that surface in our Metro DC area are whether the candidate favors censoring books at the school libraries, and whether they have a strong tie to the public shcools.

Any new ideas for helping teachers actually teach and whether they favor flexible rather than rigid “test-type” teaching is also useful.

Rev
I believe the single most fundamental flaw in our elections is knowledge.
Most people will base their vote simply by finding out which political party the candidate is a member of. Especially in national elections.
On the local scene, money is the largest hinderance a candidate has in getting their message out.
More “town hall” type meetings would help some I guess and going door to door will always be popular.
But I think the single, most important thing for all Americans is for US, the individuals, to take the time and really learn about who we are voting for.

Tim,
The American public seems too lazy to vote. This past election had one of the highest turnouts in a generation.
The trouble is getting even an uneducated populus to the polls.

At a time when the Dem. and Rep. parties are changing their identities and party platforms, it is truly an uneducated vote that votes for the party instead of the issues. Very large numbers of Democrats and Republicans have not even read or listened to the party platforms, not that they are all that revealing. But the point that was made above is extremely important. Did Republicans believe they were voting for smaller government and fiscal responsibility? For millions the answer is yes. Do they know that our government bureaucracy is increasing in size, and personal, trade, and fiscal debts are all getting larger? For millions the answer is no.

Likewise with the Democrats. Do they believe the Democratic party is opposed to corporate influence? For millions the answer is yes. Do they know that corporations have just as much campaign and lobby power of the Dem party as the Republican party when Dem’s are in power. No.

Folks who vote party line, really do not know what they are voting for. That constitutes a failure in our democracy which is predicated upon the concept of informed consent. One day in the not too distant future, it could also spell a failure in our national health economically and socially. Signs of that potential are readily visible, but, how many voters are looking? Time will tell.

Much better said David.

“The American public seems too lazy to vote. This past election had one of the highest turnouts in a generation.
The trouble is getting even an uneducated populus to the polls.”
- But it wasnt 270 million votes Rocky.
While I think 100 or so million votes from people who educate themselves on the matter is better than 270 some million who don’t bother, I also believe the country would be better with 270 million educated voters.
Party line voters just don’t make any sense to me.

rev_matt,

Here in Illinois, ever since I can remember, we’ve had an Independent Voters organization called IVI-IPO. They put out a voter’s education guide at the beginning of the election cycle, with a detailed synopsis of every candidate in every state and local race - as long as they respond to an issues questionnaire supplied by the organization.

On the eve of the election (Primary or General), they put out their list of candidate endorsements and recommendations on ballot initiatives. When it comes to judicial endorsements, they highlight their choices, but also include the Bar Association recommendations (for example) of the other judges up for retention.

This is essentially a very centrist, progressive thinking group, and their endorsements reflect that. Yes, they primarily endorse Democrats, but they have endorsed Republicans for Governor and State Treasurer in the recent past. I have been in political lockstep with their recommendations over the years, so I decided to take their judicial endorsements into the voting booth’s this time around.

I also live in a urban suburb that has some of the highest ranking schools in the state. Therefore, they take their school board elections seriously, and the local village Journal weekly covers the issues just as closely.

Two of the luxuries of living in a Blue State, I guess. Great topic, btw!!

My situation sounds very much like Bert’s.

Even though it is only occasionally that I get the opportunity to meet candidates in person and ask them questions, it doesn’t keep me from getting a sense of what they intend to do if elected.
Here in the San Francisco Bay Area every registered voter gets non-partisan voter guide in the mail outlining the candidates key issues and ideas, which is a good way to understand the differences between the choices. I always look over the guide, as well as read our local ‘Bay Guardian’ weekly paper which always takes an extremely in depth look at each of the candidates, as well as any measures that will appear on the ballot. I also take a few minutes to read over what the local Green Party recommendations are to get an understanding of their views - though I don’t automatically vote for everyone, or every measure, they’ve chosen to endorse.
Using all of the above resources, I feel able to make informed decisions, and usually make up a list of my choices (in the order they will appear on the ballot) to take into the voting booth with me - which can really save a lot of time if there are many candidates and measures on the ballot.
I often notice other people holding similar lists of their own while waiting in line to vote, so I assume many people in my area are taking the time to inform themselves by doing their own research.

I have to say that I’ve always felt that the most power should be held at the more local level possible. It’s much easier to keep an eye on and control at that point, once the power goes to a central location, like we have now, the ability to control what goes on is nearly impossible.

It may be easier to keep an eye on things, but like Matt asks, is it ever done? I have found it very difficult to get any information at all on local candidates. The papers have one or two articles and the campaign finance sites show you who’s hooked up with health care or energy but aren’t easy to navigate. I don’t know how to be an informed local voter, so I just vote against the incumbent, which is much better than a party line vote for the uninformed voter. Competition breeds quality.

The vast majority of Americans are too stupid to understand the consequences of actions. No loss if this majority dies in “terrorist” act. Everything in the universe is “terrorism”, according to the anti-terrorist fanatics — especially THEM! This word is so overused that these conservative fanatics have trivialized its real meaning.

All politics is whatever a person is able to achieve. It helps no one squabbling over whether “all politics is local” or not. Ralph Nader fought valiantly and harder than practically any other politician. (Certainly, harder than any Dem or Pub, who do no work whatsoever, living off their government-fed welfare.) Only losers who have never done any REAL hard work in their lives choose to insult or non-constructively criticize him. It’s real easy to sit on their asses and preach, rather than get personally involved in making the world better for those who need and deserve it most.

Your first entry is what has intersted me for this past year. So much so, that I began creating a resource to help others track information about local politicians and local issues. Not sure if you are interested in this, but the site is just getting started and may be something to keep in mind. The site can be found at http://www.localpolitician.com