My last post "How Tea Party Members Don't Always March to the Same Beat" generated some strong opinions from readers. My goal was to add nuance to the political discourse, reminding us that voters labeled by one particular group are not a monolith, marching in lock step - despite the caricatures portrayed in most news media.
One reader posted the following comment exemplifying this point:
Actually I totally believe the author when he says he has voted straight party line, and yet has those "progressive" opinions.
At the end of the day, voters assess the totality of the candidate and ask themselves whether they feel comfortable or not supporting one political group over another. Is the individual trustworthy? Does s/he show integrity? Does s/he agree with your most important values? Can you accept certain disagreements with the individual, some flaws? If so, which ones?
Former New York Mayor Ed Koch has some advice relevant to the 2012 Presidential Election that expresses it well:
New York Mayor Ed Koch has often said that a one-issue candidacy isn't sufficient to run on. "If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, you should vote for me," Koch often has said. "If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, you should see a psychiatrist."
Unfortunately, most news media and their audience portray candidates in simple black and white terms, often ignoring those most interesting shades of grey.
- Log in to post comments
DFepends on the 12 issues. All politicians are in favour of improving medical care, peace, making people better off, freedom, telling the truth, that eating apple pie not be criminalised, falling crime, patriotism and justice. So what are the 3 I disagree with him about?