?

Log in

 
 
02 September 2006 @ 05:45 am
My voting patterns  
I almost never vote for incumbents in primaries, if there is any alternative. I figure they get enough votes from the people that go off of name recognition alone.

A blurb that boils down to "I believe in the constitution" or "I am prepared to enforce the constitution to the letter" scares me: literalistic fundamentalism is bad enough in religion, and it doesn't belong here. That's why we don't rely on the napoleonic code as the foundation for our sense of justice.

In the 2000 presidential election, I felt like ther wasn't any significant difference between the two major candidaes. George has spent the past 6 years proving me wrong.

Every extremist nutcase thinks that their point of view is "balanced". Never, ever trust this term. Fox News and Aljazeera both claim "balance". People that acknowledge their own bias usualy earn more trust from me.

If I really don't see any meaningful distinction between candidates, I will tend to lean toward voting for female candidates.

The sun is rising; I should go to bed.
 
 
 
Stupendous Manfarmalloc on September 2nd, 2006 02:13 pm (UTC)
Have you seen this in your voter pamhplet yet?

http://pics.livejournal.com/theamazingjosh/pic/0003yd54

Good stuff that.
Jim: Bushwarpdragon on September 3rd, 2006 06:42 am (UTC)
I have noticed that people who claim to be originalists and literalists have managed to find an awful lot of power for executives, both nationally and locally, that isn't really there.

A vote for a Democratic incumbent congresscritter, even one who will win handily, will do us more good in the long term than a protest vote these days.