![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
firecatCalifornia has lots of propositions on the ballot every time a vote comes around. They produce a voter information pamphlet including a summary of the proposition and arguments for and against.
The propositions that get on the ballot from citizen initiatives are sometimes worth voting for, but the rest of them are a shell game. I vote no on anything that is presented via an emotional appeal instead of a sound argument. I vote no on anything that's more complicated than it needs to be. That means I vote no on almost everything.
The voter information pamphlet also includes statements from most of the candidates. I consider voting for candidates who have well written statements that don't insult my intelligence and that actually say something. I figure anyone who can't write a good statement or hire someone who can do it for them is too stupid or too much of a weasel to be in office.
My requirement for statements that actually say something led me to vote for a fair number of Greens this year.
I voted for almost no major party candidates because most of them didn't fill out the NPAT from Vote Smart. I consider refusal to supply information to Vote Smart a slap in the face to the electorate. "Elect me, but you don't deserve to know what I actually think about anything."
There were a few races I consulted a local newspaper on. I didn't vote exactly as they recommended, but I was really impressed with their reasoning (I guess because it tended to agree with the hunches I'd already developed).
The propositions that get on the ballot from citizen initiatives are sometimes worth voting for, but the rest of them are a shell game. I vote no on anything that is presented via an emotional appeal instead of a sound argument. I vote no on anything that's more complicated than it needs to be. That means I vote no on almost everything.
The voter information pamphlet also includes statements from most of the candidates. I consider voting for candidates who have well written statements that don't insult my intelligence and that actually say something. I figure anyone who can't write a good statement or hire someone who can do it for them is too stupid or too much of a weasel to be in office.
My requirement for statements that actually say something led me to vote for a fair number of Greens this year.
I voted for almost no major party candidates because most of them didn't fill out the NPAT from Vote Smart. I consider refusal to supply information to Vote Smart a slap in the face to the electorate. "Elect me, but you don't deserve to know what I actually think about anything."
There were a few races I consulted a local newspaper on. I didn't vote exactly as they recommended, but I was really impressed with their reasoning (I guess because it tended to agree with the hunches I'd already developed).
