How to choose a candiate...

[CryingEmo]

Make 2 columns of issues that matter to you. For example, the economy, healthcare, education, war in iraq, etc.

Get the official platforms from each canidate and read them.

Check a box in the column of the person you agree with more.

Add up the check boxes, and whoever has more is who you should vote for.


Boom, there you go.

 

[RobInKuwait]

Make 2 columns of issues that matter to you. For example, the economy, healthcare, education, war in iraq, etc.

Get the official platforms from each canidate and read them.

Check a box in the column of the person you agree with more.

Add up the check boxes, and whoever has more is who you should vote for.


Boom, there you go.

You forget that politicians lie. Often.

With two senators running, you should look at their voting records and the compare that to what they say they will do.

 

[CryingEmo]

You forget that politicians lie. Often.

With two senators running, you should look at their voting records and the compare that to what they say they will do.

That's true. Their history is important. But I also think their plans are important.

The problem is, if you say, oh they lie and can't be trusted, then you can't make a proper choice. While that may be true, realistically you really just have to see who has the better plan, otherwise you are fabricating things. You are sort of forced to take their word.

 

[RobInKuwait]

That's true. Their history is important. But I also think their plans are important.

The problem is, if you say, oh they lie and can't be trusted, then you can't make a proper choice. While that may be true, realistically you really just have to see who has the better plan, otherwise you are fabricating things. You are sort of forced to take their word.

In a way you are, but if their platform is divergent from policies they have supported in the past, or if they have a history of breaking there word, you have to factor that in.

 

[BodyWizard]

There's the classic fall-back of assessing the candidate's character, personality, & temperament. In some ways (for reasons pointed out more than adequately) the more effective yardstick is what kind of person do they seem to be? Are they genuine? Do they contradict themselves? Do they bully their way past inconveniences? Do they show maturity? Probity? Even-handedness? Do they cleave more to Truth than to Falsehood? How do they treat people? What do their relationships with others tell us?

This stuff is as important as the policy & issue stuff. We don't elect dogmas or ideologies (at least, we fail when we do) - we elect people: what kind of people they are tells us as much as the positions they espouse. IMO.

 

[vikinginc]

That's true. Their history is important. But I also think their plans are important.

The problem is, if you say, oh they lie and can't be trusted, then you can't make a proper choice. While that may be true, realistically you really just have to see who has the better plan, otherwise you are fabricating things. You are sort of forced to take their word.

Their plans? I mean . . come on, whoever has the best sales pitch in this election will win, period. Unfortunately, Obama's so damn slick and sly (in the manner he speaks and acts) that too many are sold on him. 'It's time for CHANGE' is his campaigns motto; and he promises to make changes in every aspect of government .. Now, ONLY because of our current economic crisis are people buying his B$. We're all vulnerable now that the economy is in a recession, and Obama tries to come across as the problem-solver, blowing smoke up all our a$$es, when really, he's complicating every issue in government.

They make so many promises, which, by all means, look and sound good, but they seem to forget that there's the matter of capital funding, etc. Like OBAMA's incresing spending by 1 trillion dollars; where's this coming from? We borrowing more from China? Or perhaps the UK? OH YES, I FORGOT; HE'S RAISING TAXES ! PERIOD !

Ugh, I'm scared for Tuesday . . .