Politics Question 1 – Blind votes or "bad" votes?

Which would you rather have, a vote for your candidate from someone who is voting blindly, or a vote for the opposing candidate from someone who is well-researched and has thought it out?

This entry was posted in Old Blog and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Politics Question 1 – Blind votes or "bad" votes?

  1. Josh Creason says:

    well, democratic wieners are going to go with option b, and right wing nutjobs are going to go with a.
    on this one, i have to go with my understanding of the intentions of democracy – go by your own experience, research, and beliefs when voting, even if you disagree with me.

  2. Scott says:

    Tricky – I’m not a relativist, so I’m firmly convinced that someone could spend a lifetime forming some very well researched, very well intentioned and very wrong ideas. If you’re dealing with matters of nonrelative truth, like a standardized test, you’re better off lucking into the right multiple choice answer than having a really great reason for the wrong one. So my answer is that if there really is a right answer, better that under any circumstances, but if not, go with the lesser faculties of human judgement. How’s that for conservative, Josh?

  3. Joseph says:

    I don’t think it’s an entirely false dilemma. One thing I have had a hard time recently with politics is that many members of EITHER side blindly support either Bush or Kerry, without acknowledging any weakness their favorite candidate has. Steve and I always argued that we’d rather people research their decisions and make it (even if we disagreed with each other) rather than just accept whatever the party line says. Obviously not everyone is going to intently research their candidate, but I have a lot more respect for Republicans that vote for Bush based on issues beyond Iraq than those who vote for Bush because Rush told them to.

  4. Josh Creason says:

    Conservative is not the same as “right wing nutjob”. 😉
    I like conservative, nonrelativistic answers. i don’t like unreasoned, impulsive, or close minded answers. I think it’s important to be able to step into the other party’s thoughts and be able to conclude, “if i reasoned things out with their world view or values I would come to the same conclusion.” i like internal consistency, even if i disagree with one’s conclusion.

  5. Derek Lidbom says:

    I don’t see how the question, the way I phrased it, is a “false dilemma”.

    On another note, I have a lot more respect for people who vote for Kerry than people who vote against Bush.

  6. Sarah says:

    Personally, I would obviously rather my candidate get as many votes as possible, even if votes were cast blindly.

    Nationally, I think we’d be better off if everyone researched their decision and voted.

    duh, I’m surprised all you smart people didn’t think of this already.

  7. Josh Creason says:

    But people’s values filter their interpretation of the data. Most folks’ values are aweful, so everyone researching and voting on that probably wouldn’t help make things “better off.”

  8. Joseph says:

    Derek, what if, though, you dsiagree with Bush, and as much as you dislike Kerry. he is the only viable option. I don’t like Kerry. Issue by Issue, I guess I side with him a little more, but I still feel like I am voting against Bush more than Kerry, because Kerry is not my first choice. Is that bad? I mean, what control do I have over the fact that some of the other Democratic candidates just lost the primaries?

  9. Derek Lidbom says:

    First, respect was probably a bad choice of words for me. I respect you no matter what.

    I guess if you hate what the current candidate is doing and you’ve researched the other candidate and know (as best you can) that you’ll agree with him more, then I understand it. Just make sure the alternative is indeed better. That kind of turns it into a “voting for” situation in my mind. Just don’t wrecklessly say, “anyone but Bush…anything but what this administration is doing” (btw, I don’t think that’s what you are doing).

  10. Jeremy says:

    If people are really thinking they’ll come around to my point of view, so I vote for the “thought it out” option 🙂

    I don’t really believe that, but I do support the “thought it out” option. I would always prefer that people vote from well thought out opinions, even if they don’t agree with me. I don’t want a government where everyone agrees with me. That’s called a dictatorship.

    Checks and balances, a multi-party system, differing opinions, free speech: these are the things that keep us from a society where dissenters are rounded up and executed. It’s not a matter of having the right man in power – it’s a matter of having a system of government in place that protects liberty and allows for healthy national debate.

    BTW, on a slightly related note, I think the GOP has done a masterful job over the last decade and a half of turning American politics into a debate over moral culture (the DNC has certainly done this as well, but I think the GOP spinsters are much, much better at going on the offence with this). Many, many people vote for Bush, not because of his political views, but because he’s perceived as a good Christian – “one of ours.” Many people will vote for anybody but Bush because he’s “one of them.”

    The game with labels is insanity and is a stone on the slippery slope to fascism.

  11. Dwight Ball says:

    Slippery Slope! Slippery Slope! Thought we couldn’t use that?

  12. Josh Creason says:

    funny, in general, conservative has seemed to be derogatory title to me (except amongst other conservatives where it becomes a badge of honor).
    Jeremy, i agree about the “moralization” of politics. There are some issues that weigh very heavily for folks. For instance, “if X is pro-death (ie, pro-choice), then I’m voting for the other candidate” with no consideration of other issues. At the same time, some of those issues to me are large enough that they trump the other issues (like maybe national security, social justice…). Maybe we should just vote on issues, not politicians….make this a real democracy, not a republic.

  13. Derek Lidbom says:

    I’d rather have people thinking and talking about it and making an informed decision I think. Although of course I want my candidate to get the most votes.

    There’s my answer. 😀

  14. Josh Creason says:

    Sounds like you’re predestined to have free will to me…

  15. Scott says:

    “Sounds like you’re predestined to have free will to me…”

    Can you will to be predestined? :oP

  16. Josh Creason says:

    only on certain Thursdays in a leap year.

  17. Dwight Ball says:

    The question is a false dilemma. It creates a situation based on two circumstances which are not necessarily related. Ex: “Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?” “Can God create a rock too big to lift?” What about asking people if they would be satisfied with an election outcome if they knew voters intelligently researched substance and voted on issues and record rather than superficial impressions, even though it could mean your party or candidate could lose?

  18. Ben says:

    Speaking as someone who falls pretty much in the center, I find it quite interesting that the term “liberal” has become a dirty word as of late. How come the term “conservative” doesnt evoke the same negative connotations? After all, the far left(communists) and far right (facists) are both pretty much equally bad as far as most US citizens are concerned. Also it seems that the country is split pretty much 50-50 between left-leaning and right-leaning individuals. Are the conservatives just better at demonizing the enemy than the liberals? I dont know.

    I’m just wondering……

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *