• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Straight Ticket Voting

Would you support eliminating "straight ticket voting" altogether?


  • Total voters
    27

RedAkston

Master of Shenanigans
Administrator
Moderator
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
53,925
Reaction score
39,717
Location
MS Gulf Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Would you support eliminating "straight ticket voting" altogether? In some states, the ballots have an option for "vote straight-ticket Democrat" and "vote straight-ticket Republican". Not only does this help keep in tact the juggernaut that our two-party system restrains us to, but it also allows candidates who are not qualified to get into public office. It eliminates the need for people to actually research the candidates and the issues and just vote for "their party".
 
Would you support eliminating "straight ticket voting" altogether? In some states, the ballots have an option for "vote straight-ticket Democrat" and "vote straight-ticket Republican". Not only does this help keep in tact the juggernaut that our two-party system restrains us to, but it also allows candidates who are not qualified to get into public office. It eliminates the need for people to actually research the candidates and the issues and just vote for "their party".

Out of curiosity, what state or county actually has such a system?
 
Would you support eliminating "straight ticket voting" altogether? In some states, the ballots have an option for "vote straight-ticket Democrat" and "vote straight-ticket Republican". Not only does this help keep in tact the juggernaut that our two-party system restrains us to, but it also allows candidates who are not qualified to get into public office. It eliminates the need for people to actually research the candidates and the issues and just vote for "their party".

Your solution won't fix the problem. People will vote for who they choose, and making it less convenient for a few who want to vote strait ticket won't stop that.
 
I agree with Redress. Instead of checking one box, they'll just check all of the Ds or Rs. All the proposal does is make voters spend more time checking boxes they'd normally check.

And people don't research the candidates regardless. Democracy in any form is only as good as its voters and our voters suck. Modifying the system doesn't solve the problem when the problem is voters. As voters, we could easily kick out the scumbag 1 party *cough* I mean "two" party system under current structure. We don't.
 
And people don't research the candidates regardless. Democracy in any form is only as good as its voters and our voters suck. Modifying the system doesn't solve the problem when the problem is voters. As voters, we could easily kick out the scumbag 1 party *cough* I mean "two" party system under current structure. We don't.

Really? I guess I'm not "people" then. Sure, I'm in the minority because I do take a look at things like the candidates, their views on certain issues and other factors, but I won't vote for someone with an 'R' or a 'D' next to their name unless I know where they stand. I simply think that taking away the option to vote straight ticket might make a few do some research. And a few more is better than the few that we have now is it not?
 
Really? I guess I'm not "people" then. Sure, I'm in the minority because I do take a look at things like the candidates, their views on certain issues and other factors, but I won't vote for someone with an 'R' or a 'D' next to their name unless I know where they stand.

Clearly, you are in the minority. Look at Kansas. They keep voting Republican when many of the policies their state Republicans are essentially screwing them over. Look at California. Their state legislature is full of Democrats who essentially spent them into bankruptcy. Yet both have exceedingly high rates of incumbency DESPITE as a party doing awful things to their respective states. Clearly, people in those states are not researching their candidates.

Hell, at this point, if you are seriously considering voting for a third party, you're in the minority and clearly are more willing to research candidates then most people.

But you do have to remember that it takes time and effort to keep up with all of the stances and platforms candidates have. And I'm just going to say it. Americans are lazy (we're human after all, well most of us :shock:).

I simply think that taking away the option to vote straight ticket might make a few do some research. And a few more is better than the few that we have now is it not?

Maybe. Making everyone run independent would be even better as there's no psychological anchor or framing. When every candidate is not backed by a party and cannot be stereotyped, you have to research everyone.
 
No, I want to know how to get the feature on our ballots.

When another part cares to present me with a serious choice, I may need to consider individual candidates more carefully.
 
But you do have to remember that it takes time and effort to keep up with all of the stances and platforms candidates have. And I'm just going to say it. Americans are lazy

In the age of the Internet it might only take ten or fifteen minutes of research to make an informed decision.

A lot of people will still vote for one party only, but I don't see why this practice should be encouraged.

(we're human after all, well most of us :shock:).

Except for the Lizard People :shock:
lizardpeopleb.jpg
 
I want to say maybe so I picked other. I think that the same people with the mentality of (caveman voice)"republicans good,democrats evil" or "democrats good, republicans evil" will simply just pick all democrat or all republican. So I do not know if it will do any good. It would be worth to try eliminating straight ticketing voting in a few states to see if there is actually any change.
 
Straight ticket voting is stupid, OK for the lazy, who wish to be poorly informed and they do have that right.

Who wants to remove this right ?

And, in this day and age, it is more difficult to be informed than ever.
We need election/campaign reform, even before health care reform.
 
In the age of the Internet it might only take ten or fifteen minutes of research to make an informed decision.

A lot of people will still vote for one party only, but I don't see why this practice should be encouraged.

People are intellectually lazy. It's not that it can't be done, but when you regurgitating partisan tripe like FOX News or MSNBC there's no need for you to think. I know a quite a few people like this (mostly, a lot of my extended family from Missouri), they just don't want to bother thinking about the problem. I don't know why, not when it's something as important as electing officials to office. But they'd rather go by the R or the D and vote along those lines. You ain't got to think if your a straight party voter.

Course, if you're really thinking and researching things, the R and the D option will probably just make you sick.
 
I'd support getting rid of it. Yes, you would think it would simply have people individually checking each box one party, but I don't have that much faith in the American voter. I would bet there would be a statistically significant difference in less straight ticket voting purely by removing such an option.
Laziness and inertia define the American voter, and even something as trivial as checking a bunch of boxes is enough to make them change how they vote.
 
In the age of the Internet it might only take ten or fifteen minutes of research to make an informed decision.

Okay, explain to me why people don't do this now. It takes a conscious effort to research. Hell, people HERE can't even take the time to research if the article they are posting is exceedingly one sided and if you're willing to post on a political forum, you're not the average guy. So if we cannot even do it...what makes you think others can?
 
Okay, explain to me why people don't do this now. It takes a conscious effort to research. Hell, people HERE can't even take the time to research if the article they are posting is exceedingly one sided and if you're willing to post on a political forum, you're not the average guy.

Refusal to look up a candidate and ability to look up a candidate are not the same thing.

So if we cannot even do it...what makes you think others can?

How hard is it to type "issues candidates" on google ?
 
You guys have too much faith in the average voter. In California, every voter is sent a packet filled with useful information. It contains the text of every proposed proposition, as well as a summary and a nice selection of for against arguments. Even with everything you need literally delivered to your doorstep, many Californians don't have a clue what the propositions are actually about.
 
Refusal to look up a candidate and ability to look up a candidate are not the same thing.

Be that as it may, the average's end result is not to research.

How hard is it to type "issues candidates" on google ?

How hard it is to type "Obama Import/Export Bank Brazil" into Google?
 
I generally vote "straight-ticket," even though NY doesn't have an option that makes it simple. Why? Because it's absolutely pointless to try to research the policy positions of anyone below the level of a Congressman, or maybe a State senator. I don't really give a **** what the candidates for Deputy Asst. Dist. Representative for the 83rd Precinct think about the issues - they don't do dick anyways.

However, I do think it would be a good policy decision to remove the option to vote for an entire party top to bottom. It might not make people do research, but they will be less likely to bother filling out the bottom of the ballot and there will thus be less votes for those positions.
 
You guys have too much faith in the average voter. In California, every voter is sent a packet filled with useful information. It contains the text of every proposed proposition, as well as a summary and a nice selection of for against arguments. Even with everything you need literally delivered to your doorstep, many Californians don't have a clue what the propositions are actually about.

We do the same in NYC. I love it because it means that more people are exposed to this:

The Rent Is Too Damn High Party
 
Would you support eliminating "straight ticket voting" altogether? In some states, the ballots have an option for "vote straight-ticket Democrat" and "vote straight-ticket Republican". Not only does this help keep in tact the juggernaut that our two-party system restrains us to, but it also allows candidates who are not qualified to get into public office. It eliminates the need for people to actually research the candidates and the issues and just vote for "their party".

Yes, this practice should be abolished. Ohio used to have it, and the Ohio Supreme Court found it unconstitutional. To be honest, I was a little surprised to learn that this was still in effect anywhere in the country. We vote for candidates, not political parties. Let's keep it that way.
 
I'm in favor of anything that makes my wait in line shorter. Even if the practice is removed I'm fairly certain people will still vote based on the letter beside the name instead of the candidate.
 
Taking the single choice off the ballot won't stop people from going through and picking all the Republicans or Democrats individually, it'll just make people who have never thought about the political process take more time in the booth and make the lines wait even longer.

If people are foolish enough to vote for candidates just because they have an "R" or "D" next to their name, you can't stop them, you shouldn't punish everyone else for their stupidity.
 
Because I mostly believe, while their public opinions suggest otherwise, the democratic and republican party are ultimately one in the same. Straight ticket voting will turn our country into a truly one party country.
 
Taking the single choice off the ballot won't stop people from going through and picking all the Republicans or Democrats individually, it'll just make people who have never thought about the political process take more time in the booth and make the lines wait even longer.

If people are foolish enough to vote for candidates just because they have an "R" or "D" next to their name, you can't stop them, you shouldn't punish everyone else for their stupidity.

Yes, they can still vote for all the candidates of a certain party. But that's the point, they would then be voting for actual candidates.
 
Back
Top Bottom