If you haven't listened in to EastCoastConservative podcast, you should. Good stuff. Not always in agreement, of course, but well put together and pretty thoughtful as a general rule from the episodes I've checked out.
As for the original question, I tend to first go for perceived ability to govern as that is their job. While having someone that represents my interests and views is important, I don't want someone who just does whatever the polls say. I like people who have convictions, even when they may not always align with mine, especially since I've never met anyone who I agree with on every issue. So finding someone who can engage, lead, try and get things done and usefully move things forward is my biggest criteria. That eliminates most of the demagogues. It also eliminates the "yes men" who just vote party line. I was reading recently about a Rep who had been in Congress for several terms and had introduced a grand total of 2 bills...both to rename post offices. Yeah...no. Cheers, Judah On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM, GMoney <[email protected]> wrote: > > Your sig has a link to EastCoastConservative.com....that MIGHT be a clue as > to which primary you are voting in :) > > THat being said, you don't really give enough details to decide, unless > your votes are decided by broad generalizations about candidates instead of > where they stand on particular issues. I'd suggest picking the issues most > important to you and then picking the candidate that adheres to those. If > they are still equal, then go to your tie breaker....which means vote for > the hot chick of course. > > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:26 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Time for a new thread, this time a bit more "conceptual". I'm getting > hit > > with a scenario and wonder how other folks would deal with it. > > > > Today is our Primary election. There are two candidates for State Senate > > and both provide their own unique challenge: > > * Option A is a career politician that is currently serving as Mayor. > > He's got ties to good money and on paper seems to hold up well to the > > party standard. The attack ads pin him as sympathetic and supportive of > > the other party and in the pocket of several groups that are considered > > n'er-do-well by part of the party. > > * Option B is a young woman (mid 20's) that swings more to a particular > > but vocal subset of the party. This is her first political campaign and > > she dropped out of the race for a short time after admitting to an > affair, > > then re-entered when her support base suggested that she do so. The > attack > > ads pin her as hypocritical (her platform is "honesty & integrity"... ), > > inexperienced and going to harm population groups with her agenda. > > > > So these are the two I have to pick from. I specifically didn't use > groups > > or issues to make this party neutral because I'm pretty sure this > scenario > > crosses party lines. > > > > Which would you pick? > > > > Until Later! > > C. Hatton Humphrey > > http://www.eastcoastconservative.com > > > > Every cloud does have a silver lining. Sometimes you just have to do > some > > smelting to find it. > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:372311 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
