Remove party affiliation and straight ticket voting. Yes or no and why?

No.

Party affiliation is a decent shortcut to understanding where people sit on a number of issues. While I think people should avoid voting SOLELY because of party affiliation, this concept seems premised on the idea that voting straight ticket is inherently bad.

I don't vote straight GOP because I don't care about issues. I tend to vote straight GOP because there is rarely crossover where a Democrat is going to better represent my positions, particularly in this environment.

I rarely if ever see Democrats pledging devotion to smaller government and promoting individualism over the collective. So why would I want to have to memorize more shite to walk into a voting booth?

quote:

---

You generally have months to research your candidates. Can you not a) know which candidate is a member of the GOP or B) know who you disagree with enough NOT to vote for in that amount of time. And C) is it really asking too much that you know the policies of the people you are voting for instead of just a person whom's party platform aligns more with yours.

---

A) Sure, but why
B) Sure, but why
C) I'm not saying it's asking too much. I'm saying it's a solution in search of a problem.

quote:

---

For example, inget your point in national races, but what about local? A republican commissioner vs a democrat commissioner is pointless. Same with sheriff. They can't enforce national policy, they can only uphold the law. What does it matter if they are democrat or republican? Aren't we looking for the best person for the job?

---

Your argument appears to be that people should be informed voters. Directing that toward me is nonsensical. I'm not arguing against you, I'm arguing that implementing some sort of requirement that removes partisan affiliation adds little value to the electoral process.

A lot of times local races are nonpartisan, or are such that you're voting for the most appealing member of the party you don't belong to. That's certainly the case when you're voting for City Council in Atlanta, for example.

As for local politicians and platforms, I agree it's annoying when your city treasurer is talking about Obamacare, but I don't think platforms cease being relevant on the local level. If you're running as a Democrat in a moderate or GOP-leaning area, you're probably an outlier to my general thought process about the role of government. While it doesn't matter that you support Obamacare, it matters to me that you generally find government to be a solution to societal ills. That is useful information to have, particularly when your background is as a small business owner and my research of your positions turns up only your campaign webpage and a couple of speeches you made to the town rotary.

quote:

---

I say go to an open forum with no party affiliations, and make the people educate themselves before pulling the lever

---

It's just another effort to engineer social responsibility where it doesn't presently exist, and I disagree with it.

I view it like term limits, which I also disagree with as a solution (but not from any ideological perspective). Your argument is that people are lazy and will vote based on affiliation instead of issues. The proper solution, of course, is for citizens simply not to be so lazy. I'm disregarding your unparty argument, as I think it's dumb, but more importantly, it's an opinion that shouldn't be the basis for this type of change.

I don't think removing party affiliations is going to prompt more diligence on the part of voters. At best, it's going to break down the two party system, which the people are already empowered to do if they so elect.

quote:

---

But I'm not worried about that type of comparison

---

as you shouldn't be, because it is not an attack

what you said is valid

quote:

---

I don't think removing party affiliations is going to prompt more diligence on the part of voters. At best, it's going to break down the two party system, which the people are already empowered to do if they so elect.

---

Even if people are not diligent, the result of randomly voting can't result in government that is any less effective than what the current system produces.

Straight party voting invites election corruption and fraud.

I wouldn't mind it. The insane addiction to party politics is helping to dumb down the masses. It's too east to vote for a party and ignore issues.