The Philosphy of Voting

[dragon wench]

Given that both Canada and the US have upcoming elections my attention has focused quite a lot on voting and elections generally.
As I have watched trends and shifting poll numbers one question I have often pondered has risen again to the surface...
Most namely:

Why and how do people choose to vote the way they do?

I ask such a seemingly simple question because I actually have some trouble understanding people who vote one way in a given election, and then in a diametrically opposed direction in a subsequent election..


Personally, I have always voted on the centre/left.. I vote for the party that most reflects my own values.
The only decision I ever find myself needing to make is between the centrist and "leftist" candidates, and that is usually dependent on which is most likely to defeat the Tory. So yes, in addition to basing my vote on values, strategy comes into it as well.

However, I am well aware that many people will dramatically shift their votes from one election to the next.. Their votes are based more on the concrete and the situational, I think..

Sooo, I guess I'm a bit curious. Where do people here fall? And do you have any insights into the way people vote?

[BlueSky]

Have always voted.... ....
as to the why....Hmmm...parents influenced me the most...we did (more or less) have to leave a un-named country back in the 60's, and they always voted but tended to cancel each other votes...:laugh:
and recently I heard an old timer down here say.." If you don't vote, you shouldn't bitch about the results, no matter which way it goes."...:laugh:

and I do fall into the centre/left voting block, which in the state that is home to the Creation Museum...
tends to put me in the minority....

[Tricky]

It's implicit. People vote because they 'get' to vote and feel good about themselves, not necessarily because the action knowingly makes a difference on a scale they can see and understand in everyday life. The United States in particular is run by complacency. The bastard that wins the elections always gains approval of more than half of the populous, which apparently is all that is needed for any president to idle away for four years without most of the country noticing. You end up with a system that sustains itself only because it is fundamentally incapable of reorganizing itself into something better. It can at best play tricks on people's attention spans. Nobody except for the corporate elite benefits from that.

There is nothing to voting, no 'philosophy', no nothing.

[Claudius]

I vote for who I like the best. Which probably in my case means always democrat although if I really liked a third party candidate I would vote on for them if I thought that the democratic candidate was almost as bad as the republican.

[galraen]

When I first voted when I was eighteen I voted Tory, mainly due to parental influence, then as I thought more and more for myself I drifted further and further left. I would never vote for Tory (conservative) under any circumstances now, even New Labour/Democrats are too right wing for me these days.

[Kienan]

Well, I'm nineteen, so this is my first voting year coming up. I've barely done any research at all and, honestly, overall I feel it's really pointless. I'll probably end up voting on one of two philosophies. Either the lesser of two evils (that being Obama), although I really, really don't like that philosophy because that, in my opinion, isn't what voting is about. That's what I meant about it being pointless, in my mind.

I don't want McCain or Obama (I realize this is on voting in general, but I live in the US of A, so I'll just use the examples of what I know). I don't trust either one of them, but with our current system there is no doubt at all that one of them is going to end up in the whitehouse. I don't agree with the bipartisan system here, and it's not right that only one of two people can be president each election, especially since both are always pretty much traditional, and neither will really bring about any incredible change.

I'm not saying voting doesn't change anything, I'm just saying that neither of these candidates will do anything truly revolutionary, which I believe is tragic. Anyone who would accomplish anything truly amazing would never be sponsored by either of the main parties, and we'll quite likely (as things currently stand, at least) never see a third-party candidate get elected.

The second philosophy I'd vote on, and this is the much 'better' one, although less practical, is actually vote for who I think would be the best president, which would be some third-party, left wing candidate. Considering they won't get enough mainstream support, though, my vote barely does anything.

The perfect voting system, in my mind, is giving everyone equal opportunity, equal news coverage, and encouraging people to vote for the best candidate, not just the best of the two. If everyone somehow, miraculously, voted based on my second philosophy, then that justifies the second philosophy, because they now stand a chance of getting elected. It's quite a conundrum, no?

But for now, everything is stuck, and the system holds itself back in a circular way similar to that of the second philosophy. It seems no true change is coming from within the system. I don't know which of the two philosophies I'll be voting from, though.

Sorry, I sort of rambled. I'm rather tired. That was a crap post, all rambly. Eh, to lazy to edit it. So, yeah, there's my philosophy, for what it's worth.

[Moonbiter]

I have voted since I was 18, and I've only missed one when I was stuck in Central America. I vote the way I do for three reasons: Experience, knowledge and a sense of fairness. I tend to find political -isms of any kind extremely retarded, bordering on fundamentalist religion. Hence I avoid them.

[Lady Dragonfly]

I vote the way I do for three reasons: Experience, knowledge and a sense of fairness. I tend to find political -isms of any kind extremely retarded, bordering on fundamentalist religion. Hence I avoid them.

Well said. I also find political -isms extremely retarded and regard all politicians as scumbags.
Since neither of the main political parties (dems and reps) reflect my values, I usually vote for the lesser evil. This time around there is no lesser evil, it is a freak show. I intensely dislike both candidates.
Especially Obama, my own senator I had a misfortune to vote for before.

[Tricky]

Since neither of the main political parties (dems and reps) reflect my values, I usually vote for the lesser evil. This time around there is no lesser evil, it is a freak show. I intensely dislike both candidates.

How do you get by?

[Lady Dragonfly]

How do you get by?

I don't.

[Georgi]

I have to say, tactical voting seems to play a huge part in voting in the UK. At the last local elections, the Tories got a lot of seats - but I think it's less due to people voting for the Tories as disillusioned people voting against Labour, for the only party that they think will beat them.

Myself, I'm a Lib Dem voter. Yes, essentially I suppose it's a wasted vote. The thing is, I figure if nobody votes for them because they don't have enough of a majority to get into power, the situation will carry on as it is; whereas the more people who vote for them, the less other people will feel like they're wasting their votes, and the more people will bother voting for them.

[Dowaco]

I am not religious, I am conservative on money issues and liberal on social issues, I'm registered as an independent and my philosophy is best described as Libertarian, but I tend to vote Republican because issues like the size of government, how much taxes we pay and national security is more important to me than if gay couples can marry or if Roe v Wade (abortion) is overturned or not. So I put up with the craziness of the religious right in order to get smaller government.

I have never voted for a Democrat or a third party candidate and I have been voting since 1970.

PS: This is my first post since a self imposed exile in November of 2006. (Which in itself speaks volumes about easy to remember passwords) I popped in today because the forum in which I had been discussing controversial issues has a decidedly nasty membership where personal attacks trump adult debate. SYM has always been a place for mature discussion and I missed it, but refused to post here because of one member who seems to not be around at the moment. So perhaps I will look through some old threads and do some necro posting if the moderators will forgive bumping threads as old as a few months.

[Kaer]

EDIT: Oh no, I deeply apologize for the ramble, I started typing and I didn't really stop. I'd skip to the last third for the non-canucks.

This year, I think the Canadian elections have already been decided as to who will be leading the country, and it's now more of a "do we want a majority or minority government" issue. The current government was head and shoulders above the previous several governments, and actually made more of a stand for Canadian sovereignty over aspects of our country than many other leaders in the past two decades.

In general, I look at the party which is actually targeting the issues which will be affecting us all as a whole, which is why the conservatives come to mind really quickly for me here. In Canada, the conservatives are a little bit more to the left than in other countries and I feel it shows here.

The NDP is running a smear campaign where you can't turn on the TV without hearing how Harper is a strong leader because he actually cares about trying to protect our economy from the struggles and problems which are hitting American right now. I feel that if NDP had any massive say in where the country goes, we will suffer economically. If we suffer there, it spreads out and effects everything, including the vaunted "oh no they cut the arts" problem a while back. The NDP propose a business plan which really isn't feasible in that it doesn't promote Canadian investment in other countries, something which has lead to economic powers around the world being able to shift more weight. Most of what they attack the government for are things which tend to magically disappear from public purview by the time folks like Jack Layton are back in office. I like how he manages to say that we must both pay off large companies with interests in staying here, help the needy and not raise taxes (kitchen table comments in the ads) all at the same time. Apparently the NDP are magic this year too!

The green party will get the alternative vote for all the people who think that the larger parties are evil but who don't really want to do research to see what's going on, like in most elections.

The bloc will continue it's headlong shrink as voters switch from voting for them to following whatever trend is currently going on in Ontario.

The liberals are pushing a carbon tax which is more of a tax on the west than anything. They had a really corrupt government a few years back and, in all honesty, I lived long enough under the liberal governments we had. More or less, it bugs me that progress under the liberals always seemed to be haphazard and not really directed at any one point, going this way and that way to try and follow where the voters wanted them to go without really finishing enough of it in a satisfactory manner. They also seemed all too willing to bend hands over feet for our neighbours instead of putting national issues first -- if the NAFTA issue had occured under the liberal governments, we'd likely have had the government back down from it and the predominantly liberal media in this country tone down what occured.

So I guess my vote would first be going to whoever could provide the correct response to current international issues which would affect us as a people. Right now, I feel this is centered in our international involvement across seas in volatile situations and the economic problems hitting the globe, issues which the conservatives seem most prepared to handle correctly from past experience and examples of their work.

The second would be going to the party which actually is making tangible changes to where we are taking things. The liberals have this nasty habit of spending a load of money for cultural purposes in Quebec in past years which annoys me, especially when Ontario, Alberta and BC are the areas with the most new immigrants from a variety of backgrounds coming each year. I find the benefits of this really intangible outside of the liberals fishing for the Quebec vote.

My third would probably have to go with integrity. Once again, the liberals are out of the running. The NDP seems too wavery to really stick to it's goals once it gets power and I don't think the Green has ever really been a deciding factor in causing anything worth being called a scandal.

Plus, who doesn't love the guy who shows up and toys around on Corner Gas and the Rick Mercer report, sits in the stands at hockey games and doesn't have glaring personality issues (some may argue that this is because he doesn't have one, and I can't really counter that... ).

Overall, I think a lot of people here are going to vote for Harper and the conservatives because he has strong support here due to the economic successes the country has had while he was in office, meaning that folks will feel more secure with his hands handling stuff. He's really focused on his core group of voters this year very well, the conservatives always have the west and a good portion of Ontario now, and it looks like he actually drew a good deal of support when he made the choice to cut the arts budget from people looking for, as mentioned, tangible benefits from the government. I think people will probably more or less view them as the middle ground between the NDP fluff and the liberal tax-hype.

Just my quick thoughts though!

[dragon wench]

In Canada, the conservatives are a little bit more to the left than in other countries and I feel it shows here.

Before Harper took the "Progressive" out of "Progressive Conservative" that might have some validity... Hell... Harper makes even Brian Mulroney look like a moderate...
Clearly we will have to agree to disagree here... because in my honest opinion, I consider Harper to be about half a shade away from fascism... it is only the fact that Canada is largely a centrist nation (the province of Alberta excepted... ) and that Harper is heading a minority government that has kept him somewhat in check.
Incidentally, I do not use the term "fascist" lightly here... Canada has never had a leader this far to the right (with the possible exception of RB Bennett), and the socially conservative right at that.

And incidentally, for the record, while I am quite openly to the left, I would also like to mention that I view Layton and Dion as a pair of boneheads... The political landscape in this country is bleak indeed.

[galraen]

Unfortunately I get the impression from Kaer that he thinks that Harper should win because he (along with Bush and others) helped dig us into the current financial mess with his get rich quick policies. So Harper and other rich folks have got richer very quickly and now everyone else will be paying the bill. This is a good reason to support them if you're one of those who got rich quick I guess. Not so good if your one of those who will have to foot the bill.

[jklinders]

I'm with Dragon on this one. I'm guessing you weren't around Kaer to see the mess the liberals inherited from Mulroony. There would have been nothing for Harper to cut taxes for if it wasn't for those wascally corrupt liberals. you may have forgotten that the liberals were actually the first party in decades to start paying down the debt. Harper is dangerously close to deficit territory with his wacky tax cutting. I USED to be a progressive conservative supporter until Harper's little lapdog Peter Mackay killed it out a desire for personal gain. I laughed when he lost the leadership bid for the merged party. I have never voted liberal but can you really say Harper has integrity when he breaks his own election law to avoid getting slaughtered next year at the polls when his poor economic policy drags us down with the US? I don't even know where I am voting this year... they all suck...sigh

[xopherdavis]

Back to the initial topic - I think a person's parents, or whoever most influences their values, will affect how they vote. In the U.S. people almost always vote the same as their parent's party. I saw some statistic that in France most younger people don't even know what their parent's party is, although I suspect they may have the same, or similar, influence on their values. Another characteristic of the U.S. is that while there is a range of political values and ideas we are almost forced to choose either red or blue. Even if you belong to an independent party like me (green) I know that its a complete waste to vote anything but red and blue.

I also cannot comprehend the concept of "swing" voters, unless these people are severly schizophrenic or bipolar. No matter how center you are, you can usually see clear different results from one politician or another (even if they're all corrupt). My only guess is that these people probably belong to an independent mind set, whether they realize it or not, but get forced into the red or blue choice which makes them wobble.

[jklinders]

OI suppose I should stick to topic as well, When I vote it is for whatever individual or party best expresses my views at the time. I guess that makes me what an american would describe as a swing voter. I do NOT vote along party lines because the people and goals of political parties change over time. I am by no means indecisive in this thinking. I research the issues, check what parties are saying vs their actions, then decide. Last 3 elections at nearly all levels of gov't for me have been choices between bad and worse.

[Kaer]

General.

I'd sort of hope that most folks in a country are more moderate and vote on party benefits and driving issues in their ridings, than have too many folks who are hardset in their ways even when they are supporting a party platform which makes no sense.

Ironically, my parents always taught me to go out and do some reading each year to know which way you are going to vote next. Although my mother absolutely hates voting where I am -- people here would vote for a sweaty gym sock if it was conservative.

Canucks.

Taking 'impressions' from posts online is dangerous indeed, galrean, and likewise, jklinders -- without the ability to pick up a tone or a wink I might drop in real life, it's more likely you'll end up assuming things which may be somewhat stretched from the truth of the matter or miss the mark entirely.

As I said in my post, "Overall, I think a lot of people here are going to vote for Harper and the conservatives because he has strong support here due to the economic successes the country has had while he was in office." I neither say I agree or that I disagree, or that it's true or not. I'm not an economist, I've only been doing research on some things that personally interest me, and having not hit the economy super hard yet I'm definitely not lending my opinion to anything definitive. You cannot argue that the economy is likely going to be a central component of the upcoming election, and I think it may be even more important than in the past ones.

I stopped listening to folks who say that Harper's policies will fail unless they actually have some actual credible source with the required skills to know, since several articles I've read have been, as mentioned, a liberal sponsored source (which means less good news for NDP, Green on the Torries), or a source which later turned out to be misinformed. That might not sound odd, but you'd be shocked how many times the articles have questionable credibility! There have likely been mistakes with the current government. I do feel that the it's more of a choice as to whether or not the conservatives get a minority (lets keep our fingers crossed for that) or a majority (never again).

I'm sorry, jk, but I definitely feel that when it comes to integrity, no party has it less than the liberals.

What I find most interesting is that when the topic of taxes comes up, it's always some odd contradictory series of comments I've seen on forums I'm a member of. The NDP wants to cut taxes, which is good, but the conservatives cut taxes, that was bad. Or, like the one I mentioned previously, somehow the NDP are going to lower taxes, get more doctors, and sink more money into giving money to big corporations, all at the same time. All the parties have had these sort of targets painted on them, all with oversimplified explanations as to why that party 'sucks', and people have these tendacies to go along with them without stopping to think about what exactly the commercials or articles are saying, ie checking everything themselves. It's what I've been spending some time over the last few days doing, I don't plan to vote without a few good hours of some form of knowledge under my belt.

I think fascism is still pretty strong, but I lol'd majorly when I read the bonehead comment! :laugh: I always sort of consider them like a group of kindergardeners. Have you ever watched one of those House of Commons broadcasts? Dear lord, it's like a bunch of children crying and pointing and screaming and insulting each other. :speech:

Also, lol! Only been a redneck for a few years, definitely feel more connected to Ontario than to Alberta.

[jklinders]

I think we can agree to disagree Kaer. You may have missed in a previous post, I've never voted liberal. I think we can readily agree that politics by it's nature is a very dirty business. It took 11 years of office for the stink to drive the libs out. The deficit was paid off using employment insurance surpluses which is just about the single biggest act of theft in Canadian history. The conservatives don't smell too much yet because the dirty laundry has not had time to pile up yet.


You are absolutely spot on with your comment on media reliability. I maintain several sources of news and if something juicy comes up I cross reference it. Harper still scares the crap outta me in ways no other leader in Canada did.