Our judges are elected in a "non-partisan" section of the ballot, but when you go to their web pages the party affiliation is prominent. You can take the D or R off the ballot, but not from the politics.
I mean if people are going to a candidates web page I'd call that an improvement. Forcing a voter to learn something about a candidate is better than just checking the box.
There are states that have "straight-ticket voting" where you just select your party and then all your votes go to the candidate aligned with that party. You don't even have to know the name of who you're voting for.
Big fan of vote411's ballot building tool for this. It gives you a quick summary of some key issues for each candidate, though obviously more in depth research is great too.
People vote differently. I used to look up every person's name, prop, measure to get a good look at everything/everyone. Nowadays I use dsa voter guide and look up everything/everyone they don't cover.
Maybe I'm a sheep but I am dsa aligned so I would've voted for whoever/whatever they endorsed anyway so it just saves my time
Of course, I have already internalized several names off the top of my head from seeing their names around and already have strong feelings towards/against them so there's that.
Yes, often it's one of those two ways. There are also people who vote based on party affiliation, personal/organisational endorsement, religious affiliation/endorsement, looks/style/voice/charisma, and even some who choose more or less at random just to have participated.
That's because the different shapes kind of group the signs, so you can see at a glance whether the sign is a mandate, a warning or purely informational. Well, that's how European signage works anyway. US signage shapes appear a lot less organized.
In the US, a vast majority of people vote by party. They may not even know the candidates by name, and simply vote "straight ticket."
But I was in line to vote a few years ago and overheard someone say something like "yeah I saw more signs for This Guy than for That Guy, so I guess I'll vote This Guy."
I have also heard it's not uncommon for Americans to vote for candidates they think are more attractive, or have a name they like more.
There are enough voters who don't vote straight-ticket that it occasionally happens that different elections with the same electorate at the same time have different parties winning. For example in 2024, voters in Nevada elected a Democrat to the Senate, but gave the state's electoral votes to Trump.
I've encountered a lot politicians on the ballots that are very popular, but their website is trash (lacking clarity on issues) or non existent. If they don't have the ability to find a company (or 12 year old kid) to make a website for a few hundred bucks with words that describes their platform, they probably are not capable of achieving anything in office.
19 replies
They mostly vote by party affiliation. If we could get that R and D off the ballot suddenly, we'd get some really interesting results
Our judges are elected in a "non-partisan" section of the ballot, but when you go to their web pages the party affiliation is prominent. You can take the D or R off the ballot, but not from the politics.
I mean if people are going to a candidates web page I'd call that an improvement. Forcing a voter to learn something about a candidate is better than just checking the box.
There are states that have "straight-ticket voting" where you just select your party and then all your votes go to the candidate aligned with that party. You don't even have to know the name of who you're voting for.
Big fan of vote411's ballot building tool for this. It gives you a quick summary of some key issues for each candidate, though obviously more in depth research is great too.
People vote differently. I used to look up every person's name, prop, measure to get a good look at everything/everyone. Nowadays I use dsa voter guide and look up everything/everyone they don't cover.
Maybe I'm a sheep but I am dsa aligned so I would've voted for whoever/whatever they endorsed anyway so it just saves my time
Of course, I have already internalized several names off the top of my head from seeing their names around and already have strong feelings towards/against them so there's that.
Yes, often it's one of those two ways. There are also people who vote based on party affiliation, personal/organisational endorsement, religious affiliation/endorsement, looks/style/voice/charisma, and even some who choose more or less at random just to have participated.
Different voters vote differently. This is really testing the limits of the sub IMHO.
How?
because it's impossible to make general statements about how "people" in general vote; each voter has different motivations for voting
I ment general consensuses. And how does it test the limits of this sub? What rule?
It tests whether there really are no stupid questions.
no stupid questions? no, stupid questions!
Would you rather me ask why road signs are different shapes?
That's because the different shapes kind of group the signs, so you can see at a glance whether the sign is a mandate, a warning or purely informational. Well, that's how European signage works anyway. US signage shapes appear a lot less organized.
In the US, a vast majority of people vote by party. They may not even know the candidates by name, and simply vote "straight ticket."
But I was in line to vote a few years ago and overheard someone say something like "yeah I saw more signs for This Guy than for That Guy, so I guess I'll vote This Guy."
I have also heard it's not uncommon for Americans to vote for candidates they think are more attractive, or have a name they like more.
Basically, we're pathologically stupid
One of he reasons Trump won in the first place was probably that he was a celebrity
There are enough voters who don't vote straight-ticket that it occasionally happens that different elections with the same electorate at the same time have different parties winning. For example in 2024, voters in Nevada elected a Democrat to the Senate, but gave the state's electoral votes to Trump.
I go to their website and look at the issues.
I've encountered a lot politicians on the ballots that are very popular, but their website is trash (lacking clarity on issues) or non existent. If they don't have the ability to find a company (or 12 year old kid) to make a website for a few hundred bucks with words that describes their platform, they probably are not capable of achieving anything in office.
Every single person does eenie meenie miney moe.