Friday, September 12, 2008

Informed Voting

Last night, I spent some time on the phone, polling. I left once I could no longer feel my left ear.

Some of the questions asked what people knew or had heard about Curt Bramble and RaDene Hatfield. I was not surprised that none of the people I talked to had heard of RaDene, though I find that unfortunate. Only 2 people I polled had heard of Bramble--one only knew the name and the other knew about my pizza delivery experience (I was unseccessful in restarining a snicker). Most of the people I talked to had never heard of any of the local candidates I asked about but all said that they will very likely vote in the elections.

Now some of these people may have just moved to Utah County, so I can excuse them for being uninformed. To those who have been around for a year or more and are uninformed: I see that you and I are standing together in a crowded boat. How many people vote without knowing the candidates? How many people participate in local elections because they are concerned with one office and then vote blindly for all the other offices? I raise my hand and hang my head in shame, but I'm sure I'm in good company.

Everyone I talked to happened to be declared republicans and, when asked, said they would probably vote a straight repulican party ticket but they would vote for a democrat if he or she shared their views on important issues. Fair enough, right?--I mean, political parties have platforms that their members stick to more or less, so voting for a party is a good rule of thumb when you don't know the candidates. Um, false. When an issue is really important to a lot of people, it becomes controversial because everyone has a different opinion and lots of people are impassioned. The more controversial an issue is, the more likely candidates are to stray from party platforms because platforms tend to be extreme while reasonale, free-thinking individuals tend to be moderate and cooperative. (I realize there are exceptions, so please don't list them for me.)

Once again, I'm saying that party is--or should be--irrelevent in voting. Political parties give people the option to stop thinking for themselves. What a terrible option!

5 comments:

dj4aces said...

You're right. Political parties - when voting - should never be about, but so often are, giving up your free thought. Unfortunately, people on both sides of the aisle fall into that trap.

People always seem to think that when you vote Democratic, you're voting for, let's say, abortion. It's just not all that simple. The world isn't black and white. There is no right or wrong answer. There is, however, always a better way of doing something.

I hope you kind of follow what I'm saying, here. My thoughts are sort of disjointed at the moment.

Roobah said...

http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2008/09/16/the_coming_revolution?page=full&comments=true

Chuck Norris tells us of the coming Revolution

Chuck says that smart people are waking up in America. Chuck has some good advice for people who feel that 9% of our congress-persons represent our interests. Chuck says it only takes 2 percent of us to effect real changes.

I think Anna is one of the 2 percent. It seems, according to Chuck, all it takes is a recognition that something isn't quite right and asking yourself if you were able to act, could you do what your legislator does better? If not, can you speak out for potential legislators who can do it better? According to Chuck, it only takes 2 percent.

In Chuck's own words, "Half our problem today is that we have been duped to vote into office individuals who have no integrity. A politician's integrity must precede our interests because if leaders are above reproach, then they are more likely to do what they've promised. And if you can't find a more upstanding citizen than you are, then consider running for public office. It's time to get out of the bleachers and onto the battlefield."

*It appears Chuck has jumped his political ship.

Roobah

Annie said...

wether it's politics or your personal blog I like reading what you write. You definetely have a way with words and have the potential toreally do something with this gift.
ps...... I don't even live in Utah anymore but still plan on following your blog

Heather said...

I wish it were a lot easier to get information about local politicians and issues, then more people would probably think about each candidate they are voting for instead of voting a straight ticket.

MA & PA Walker said...

Thank you for your two blogs! My wife and I are new to Utah this year, and have been researching the candidates. I must admit, we only new who we are voting for for President (same as we did 4 years ago while living in New York -- Ralph Nader.) In New York we were registerd "Independent" party. Here in Utah they tell us we are "Unaffiliated." I hope Mr. Bramble learns how to better treat people. We can all improve! Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and experiences. I believe I met your boss when I visited here a couple of years ago; we talked Red Sox for a while.