Single Issue Voters

OrnotBitwise

OrnotBitwise

Watermelon
Is there really anything wrong with being a "single issue" voter? I'm genuinely unsure and am curious about what people here think.

Klaatu, this is so you, baby. :)

We all sort of know what a single issue voter is, I think. It's somebody for whom one particular issue overshadows everything else, to an enormous degree. Single issue voters tend to be passionate about their issue and they are therefore relatively easy to mobilize.

Gay rights, for and against, are two obvious examples. So are both sides of the abortion debate -- and we all know what I think about anti-abortion voters. We've got a couple of anti-government-anything guys on here too.

A lot of us, including me, bitch about single issue voters. Especially when they're on the opposing side. But is there really anything wrong with it? Suppose a gay person is more concerned about gay rights than anything else. Is that surprising? I think not. Is he or she wrong for voting that way? I doubt it. Hey, at least they're voting.
 
.

There's really nothing wrong with it.

Personally, I wish people would vote on a broader spectrum of issues.
 
Cypress said:
There's really nothing wrong with it.

Personally, I wish people would vote on a broader spectrum of issues.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is something wrong with it. They lack a balanced viewpoint, a sense of proportion, to the point where they can't see the big picture, and can be manipulated by sleazy politicians and a subservient media to ignore more subtle, yet more important issues, to the detriment of all of us.
 
I have been accused of being a single-issue voter. I don't really think there is any such thing. Sure, there are certain issues that get people active, abortion for me, but I don't think there is anyone that votes only on one issue. I may be very vocal on the abortion issue but that does not mean that it is the only issue that matters to me.

I've moderated a lot on the issue since coming to politics.com. But it was never the only issue that mattered to me. Sure, maybe I tended to vote for the party that claimed to oppose abortion but that was because they also claimed to hold other values that I have.

It has become obvious to me since I became active that the Republican Party is more talk than action. I should have known that before, but not having been active in political discussion, I was not.

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
It has become obvious to me since I became active that the Republican Party is more talk than action. I should have known that before, but not having been active in political discussion, I was not.

Immie
Click to expand...

*Sigh*, but the other side certainly doesn't hold those values... Sometimes there is no real choice.
 
Immy,

I've definitely accused you of such and unless you've changed your outlook significantly, I still stand by it. Pre 11/04 you're voting for Kerry came down to, "I can't support someone that isn't against killing the unborn" Dispite Bush's massive failures and incompetencies you said you would choose him over Kerry because Kerry wouldn't limit or outlaw abortions.

I have to disagree with Cypress and Ornot on this one. I think one issue voting can be pretty bad, particularly when you ignore massive failures and inadequecies of one candidate because he or she sides with you on your pet issue. That's exactly how Bush got into office - gay marriage ring a bell.
 
I am interested in almost all issues, but I see the biggest threat to economic freedom and our higher standard of living as those who would push government universal healthcare which is the last major thing that seperates us from other countries.
I won't even consider voting for a politician who wants that and when regular people factor in the massive tax increases that are needed to support universal healthcare, they won't either, just like we saw in '94.
Dems should drop it forever.
 
Ornot ... I hope you meant this "is me" because I have always frowned on the practice of single issue voting. I look for the over all betterment of Society ..the individual whom I think is proposing the best package..
Although I am Pro-Life ..in the past I have voted for Pro-Choice candidates ..i.e. Bill Clinton the first time around.
I am against capital punishment but I have voted for pro death penalty candidates. To the best of my ability ..I seek out the one who is closest to proposing the total package.
IMHO .. one issue voting is selfish ... a little Star Trek here for ya . "It is logical... The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." ...
 
Single issue voters are more easially misled and used by the political parties.
Some people cannot understand and balance out the issues, it is just easier to grab on to one issue and vote based on that one issue.
 
TheDanold said:
I am interested in almost all issues, but I see the biggest threat to economic freedom and our higher standard of living as those who would push government universal healthcare which is the last major thing that seperates us from other countries.
I won't even consider voting for a politician who wants that and when regular people factor in the massive tax increases that are needed to support universal healthcare, they won't either, just like we saw in '94.
Dems should drop it forever.
Click to expand...

that's why I said, "Can" be bad. You could argue that 'universal healthcare' is not really a "one issue". There would be other issues that would arise from that would ultimately cause concern: quality of health care service, taxes, economic impact, etc. People that vote based on things like gay marriage and abortion tend to have issues with the acts themselves (i.e. its sinful), not necessarily the negative social or economic impacts of that issue if they even really exist.
 
LadyT said:
Immy,

I've definitely accused you of such and unless you've changed your outlook significantly, I still stand by it. Pre 11/04 you're voting for Kerry came down to, "I can't support someone that isn't against killing the unborn" Dispite Bush's massive failures and incompetencies you said you would choose him over Kerry because Kerry wouldn't limit or outlaw abortions.

I have to disagree with Cypress and Ornot on this one. I think one issue voting can be pretty bad, particularly when you ignore massive failures and inadequecies of one candidate because he or she sides with you on your pet issue. That's exactly how Bush got into office - gay marriage ring a bell.
Click to expand...

Oh well, think what you will. Kerry offered me nothing except for his arrogance. Not a damned thing in any issue.

Immie
 
LadyT said:
Well, its hard to debate when you're being that sensible.:p
Click to expand...


Sorry, I lost faith in the Bush Admin. True it was not before the '04 elections but I was on the verge. I just needed one good push and no one pushed. ;)

Immie
 
I'm not sure what you want Immanuel, the Repubs stopped funding overseas abortions and they put in an honest effort to ban partial birth abortion. They also speak out against it.
There was also a vote to stop public funding of abortions in the senate which most Republicans voted on your side for.
I know you're impatient with them (as I am for different reasons), but I just think you expect too much.
 
TheDanold said:
I'm not sure what you want Immanuel, the Repubs stopped funding overseas abortions and they put in an honest effort to ban partial birth abortion. They also speak out against it.
There was also a vote to stop public funding of abortions in the senate which most Republicans voted on your side for.
I know you're impatient with them (as I am for different reasons), but I just think you expect too much.
Click to expand...

How about some damned integrity? A little bit of honesty goes a hell of a long way.

Immie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top