Elections this Tuesday, any suggestions?

[freesoul]

I usually go to the both and click on “vote all republican candidates” Then click vote button and walk out. If you can enlighten me little bit more about this elections I will greatly appreciate.

Thundrr1 told me that last time by clicking vote “all republican” I voted for wrong judge.

congrats you are behaving like a good republican cog.

I use the FOAC guide and if it says "no suitable" then I don't vote for that office.

[Gman106]

congrats you are behaving like a good republican cog.

I use the FOAC guide and if it says "no suitable" then I don't vote for that office.

So you behave like a good FOAC cog? Below is the FOAC endorsement sheet for my county. They vast majority—include the seats up for grabs in my district, are listed as "no suitable candidate." Sorry, despite the good work at FOAC, I'm not going to sit out my vote based on their assessment. I research the candidates and the issues, and though I've yet to find an ideal candidate through the years, I don't think I've ever found a (D) who aligned with me over an (R). In the rare event an (I) is a truly viable candidate, I will consider, but a viable (I) candidate is rare.

https://foac-pac.org/voter_guides/20...-5A-Vers-3.pdf

[Johannes_Paulsen]

I have always thought that the 'party line' vote option is meant for the poorly-informed, barely-literate voters who are trucked to the polls by party machines so that they can perpetuate the rule of politicians who ultimately must seek to destroy your liberties to keep themselves in power. It's unworthy of anyone who aspires to the ideal of 'citizen'.

Here's my voting guide:

* Don't assume that because a candidate has the term "Republican" next to his/her name that they are a friend to liberty generally and the right to keep and bear arms in particular. Tom Corbett seems to have been okay on the issue, all things considered. Tom Ridge was not. Neither was Ronald Reagan. There's no reason to assume that any given unknown GOP candidate won't be soft on the issue.

* The Democratic party has, since 1824, backed slavery, secession, sedition, segregation, and socialism. It's pretty safe to say that almost any time there was a fight over civil liberties, the Democrats have, in whole or in part, fought either to extend government power over the individual, or winked and nodded while entire ethnic groups were oppressed with violence. While due to quirks of local politics, there may occasionally be a good person who runs under their standard, any candidate should warrant a great deal of skepticism before earning your support.

* Mathematically, your vote probably won't count for much. That said, on the very long chance that it does, if you don't know anything about candidates for a particular office or a referendum issue, do your fellow citizens a favor and refrain from voting on those particular offices/issues.

* Read this essay from Robert Nozick before voting, too. https://web.duke.edu/philsociety/taleofslave.html

[Gman106]

I have always thought that the 'party line' vote option is meant for the poorly-informed, barely-literate voters who are trucked to the polls by party machines so that they can perpetuate the rule of politicians who ultimately must seek to destroy your liberties to keep themselves in power. It's unworthy of anyone who aspires to the ideal of 'citizen'.

Here's my voting guide:

* Don't assume that because a candidate has the term "Republican" next to his/her name that they are a friend to liberty generally and the right to keep and bear arms in particular. Tom Corbett seems to have been okay on the issue, all things considered. Tom Ridge was not. Neither was Ronald Reagan. There's no reason to assume that any given unknown GOP candidate won't be soft on the issue.

* The Democratic party has, since 1824, backed slavery, secession, sedition, segregation, and socialism. It's pretty safe to say that almost any time there was a fight over civil liberties, the Democrats have, in whole or in part, fought either to extend government power over the individual, or winked and nodded while entire ethnic groups were oppressed with violence. While due to quirks of local politics, there may occasionally be a good person who runs under their standard, any candidate should warrant a great deal of skepticism before earning your support.

* Mathematically, your vote probably won't count for much. That said, on the very long chance that it does, if you don't know anything about candidates for a particular office or a referendum issue, do your fellow citizens a favor and refrain from voting on those particular offices/issues.

* Read this essay from Robert Nozick before voting, too. https://web.duke.edu/philsociety/taleofslave.html

Huh? My vote counts as much as any other honest vote, which is one vote. You're right, my one vote is mathematically irrelevant, but adding my one vote to another plus another is not, nor is one person sitting out plus another plus another. The later is exactly how we ended-up with four more years of this disastrous o-hole regime.

[Johannes_Paulsen]

Huh? My vote counts as much as any other honest vote, which is one vote. You're right, my one vote is mathematically irrelevant, but adding my one vote to another plus another is not, nor is one person sitting out plus another plus another. The later is exactly how we ended-up with four more years of this disastrous o-hole regime.

Not sure what you're disagreeing with here.

[freesoul]

So you behave like a good FOAC cog? Below is the FOAC endorsement sheet for my county. They vast majority—include the seats up for grabs in my district, are listed as "no suitable candidate." Sorry, despite the good work at FOAC, I'm not going to sit out my vote based on their assessment. I research the candidates and the issues, and though I've yet to find an ideal candidate through the years, I don't think I've ever found a (D) who aligned with me over an (R). In the rare event an (I) is a truly viable candidate, I will consider, but a viable (I) candidate is rare.

https://foac-pac.org/voter_guides/20...-5A-Vers-3.pdf

I personally do my own homework on who I cast a vote for, my suggestion was that if you are going to use any organization to base your vote on then use FOAC- unless you disagree with the progress they have made in reclaiming our A1S21 guarantees via Castle Doctrine and HB80.

If you feel forced to push a button for every office, well thats your demon to bear. There are many times I leave an office without a vote- or write in something ridiculous because honestly its funny when they have to read it off and write it down at the end of the night!!!!

[thundrr1]

Pretty sure Thundrr1 is mistaken...

I'll stand by my comment.

http://forum.pafoa.org/delaware-14/2...ses-8-p-m.html

[Gman106]

Originally Posted by Gman106 View Post
Huh? My vote counts as much as any other honest vote, which is one vote. You're right, my one vote is mathematically irrelevant, but adding my one vote to another plus another is not, nor is one person sitting out plus another plus another. The later is exactly how we ended-up with four more years of this disastrous o-hole regime.

Not sure what you're disagreeing with here.

We disagree in the power of a single vote. You highlighted one half of a dependent clause and ignored the rest, which is that my single vote becomes consequential when added to every other single vote, especially in big elections (e.g., fed or state). I will hasten to add my single vote is very consequential and relevant in local elections where I've seen races won or lost on a single vote.

.

[Egres]

So I'm thinking:
Governor:Tom Corbett (A from NRA. Pass from FOAC)
Lt. Governor: Thomas W. Corbett (A from NRA. Pass from FOAC)
U.S. House of reps, District 1: Megan Rath (A from NRA. Pass from FOAC)
State Senate, District 8: LEAVING BOX BLANK Anthony Hardy Williams DEMOCRAT (D- from NRA. No pass from FOAC)

NOT sure what to do on this one:State house rep, District 162: Nicholas Miccarelli ( just C from NRA, No pass from FOAC) I will probably vote for him, better him then Democrat with F rating.

[Egres]

Just voted. Since State house rep, District 162: Nicholas Miccarelli running unopposed because democrat dropped out from the race. So I decided not to vote for Miccarelli, maybe low republican vote count will get him thinking.