Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently changed my voter registration for two reasons. The first was because I am tired of both parties and I also have beliefs on both sides of the fence. The next reason (especially now with all the extremists) was for strategic reasons. If I don't have any issues with the group of people running in one party but there clearly is a person in the other party that I strongly disagree with I will choose their party's ballot.
This year's primary is definitely one where I will be voting against and not for.
interesting.
so, does one vote FOR this "bad" person, to move them along to the general so they can get trounced by the other party?
or do we vote FOR the better alternative, and then consider them in the general, or even hope they win?
or are we voting for the "lesser of 2 evils", still expecting them to lose the General to your preferred candidate in the other party?
I mean, if we take the NC Senate, for example. While I saw many names on the Dem ballot, IIRC the overwhelming favorite (Cheri Beasley) was listed last. So, if you were a Dem, but registered independent, and then went and got the R ballot. Perhaps you don't want MAGA Budd, so you vote for Mcrory. But does this happen under the assumption that Beasley will beat McRory?
I mean, if for example this was me, I think I'd choose the most extreme ("unelectable") candidate from the other side.
I did look at the samples, and there's many more D races being voted on than R.
I took this exact initiative in 2016 primaries and...well things didn't exactly play out the way I'd hoped (incidentally I also had to cast a provisional ballot that was apparently not counted anyways).
As I'm not in one of the heated congressional districts and the statewide/county-wide presumptive nominees are already a given; I'll admit I sat out primaries.
I'm most disappointed that the barrage of ads I've been subjected to on WRAL - not 1 was in my district
I'm most disappointed that the barrage of ads I've been subjected to on WRAL - not 1 was in my district
Yep. Same. The old soul in me really enjoys watching Jeopardy! live on weeknights when possible....but the back to back to back congressional primary ads for candidates for whom I'm not even in the same jurisdiction was nauseating.
I guess it's to be expected. There was very low turnout at the Brier Creek Community Center this morning. No line and very few people voting. I guess I didn't need to wear my diaper to stand in line.
I went around 11AM to my polling place near Garner. A couple folks in line, but pretty quiet. I was number 110 to vote today, according to the tabulating machine.
Location: Chapel Hill, NC, formerly NoVA and Phila
9,784 posts, read 15,850,517 times
Reputation: 10909
I was number 177 at my polling place at about 10:30 AM. It is never crowded there, and I don't think I have ever waited in line. I'm pretty sure that we have high voter turnout in my neighborhood, so many must vote early.
I recently changed my voter registration for two reasons. The first was because I am tired of both parties and I also have beliefs on both sides of the fence. The next reason (especially now with all the extremists) was for strategic reasons. If I don't have any issues with the group of people running in one party but there clearly is a person in the other party that I strongly disagree with I will choose their party's ballot.
This year's primary is definitely one where I will be voting against and not for.
We are registered no affiliation and I tried to get DD to go this route LOL. She wasn't having it but that's fine.
so, does one vote FOR this "bad" person, to move them along to the general so they can get trounced by the other party?
or do we vote FOR the better alternative, and then consider them in the general, or even hope they win?
or are we voting for the "lesser of 2 evils", still expecting them to lose the General to your preferred candidate in the other party?
I mean, if we take the NC Senate, for example. While I saw many names on the Dem ballot, IIRC the overwhelming favorite (Cheri Beasley) was listed last. So, if you were a Dem, but registered independent, and then went and got the R ballot. Perhaps you don't want MAGA Budd, so you vote for Mcrory. But does this happen under the assumption that Beasley will beat McRory?
I mean, if for example this was me, I think I'd choose the most extreme ("unelectable") candidate from the other side.
I did look at the samples, and there's many more D races being voted on than R.
I think each each situation is handled differently especially when you get a feeling from listening to others talk about these candidates and "think" you might know where it is heading. We also know that primaries don't garner a huge turnout so sometimes "those" candidates (especially's in today's world) will get more people to the polls. I'm hoping not but if they do I am hoping that there are others like me that feel this way and will vote to ensure that person is not on the general ballot.
And since you brought up the NC Senate situation (which is primarily why I am voting in the primary. That and also Sheriff) I plan to vote for someone that I think may have a slight chance of beating the person that I am actually trying to vote against. It's also a person that if they did win in the primary and had to run against the other person in the general election and that other person lost I would actually be OK with it.
As for Sheriff, I AM voting for who I want to actually win in the general election. I'm hoping if he is on the general ballot and the other person that I REALLY don't want to win happens to be on it that people in that party might be willing to vote across party lines if they too have been very disappointed in performance.
It's all really just a $*&^shoot. At some point, if things continue to get crazier and crazier, I am just going to unplug from many things and probably not even vote anymore. It really is a sad place that we are in and the parties are both getting crazier and crazier and the majority of candidates all stink. I'm really not looking forward to 2024. We need some fresh faces on both sides....OR we finally need a strong candidate in the middle that can hopefully try to unite us more and squelch the extremism going on.
so, does one vote FOR this "bad" person, to move them along to the general so they can get trounced by the other party?
or do we vote FOR the better alternative, and then consider them in the general, or even hope they win?
or are we voting for the "lesser of 2 evils", still expecting them to lose the General to your preferred candidate in the other party?
All of cases are reasons to be Unaffiliated. The answer to your question depends on the election, of course.
Quote:
I mean, if we take the NC Senate, for example. While I saw many names on the Dem ballot, IIRC the overwhelming favorite (Cheri Beasley) was listed last. So, if you were a Dem, but registered independent, and then went and got the R ballot. Perhaps you don't want MAGA Budd, so you vote for Mcrory. But does this happen under the assumption that Beasley will beat McRory?
Polls had already shown that McCrory would probably lose to Beasley. Budd is a tighter race or even leaning in his direction. So yes, trying to chip away at Budd is a very valid reason to vote R, if you know you're going to vote for Beasley in the general.
Quote:
I mean, if for example this was me, I think I'd choose the most extreme ("unelectable") candidate from the other side.
The problem is that there are usually more than two candidates. So for a race where you really hate one "leader", you could either vote for the other "leader" who's most likely to maybe beat them, or if you think they'll all be kind of tied and maybe you can keep somebody below the 30% runoff threshold, you might just toss a vote to somebody obscure.
All of these are perfectly valid strategies for voting, as long as they continue to pave party-based primaries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
