So I'm curious. How do you usually vote? Financially or Socially?

User Forum Topic
Submitted by Coronita on June 8, 2007 - 7:27am

So I'm curious folks. How do most people here vote?

Do you and your family vote with your financial interest in mind first, or do you vote with your social interests in mind first?

Note trying to start a political debate here. Just curious who puts their financial interests first.

For example, some folks say in rural America tend to vote conservative because they feel strongly about creationism versus evolution, anti-abortion versus pro choice, anti-gay versus prop-gay rights,etc....
Often, it seems like they end up voting against their own financial self interest, because those parties have opposing financial interests....

Me personally, I tend to support socially liberal minded folks who are fiscally conservative and/or that leave my income well alone. For example, I could care less about being anti-gay rights or creationism/versus evolution. I would care more about the incoming Pres that would say "no more 15% cap gains".

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 8, 2007 - 7:56am.

Nor_LA-Temcu-SD-Guy

I vote financial interests in mind first , followed by new renewable energy Tech and Tech industry supporting interests.

Submitted by slackerboy on June 8, 2007 - 8:43am.

I think all the old rules have been broken with the current administration. We have a social conservative and a fiscal disaster in office right now. Our governer is more liberal than many Democrats, so I vote for fiscal conservatives that are socially liberal, mainly a Libertarian point of view. The Republicans are for larger government and so are the Democrats. The basic difference is the R's borrow and spend and the D's tax and spend. I would say tax and spend is better, at least we are spending cash and not making our grandchildren pay for our follies. By the way my household income is around 200k and and I paid cash for my modest condo and drive a 2000 Toyota, so I know I am not typical when it comes to the American way of life. We have zero debt... But we also only have to work part-time 9 months of the year and the rest of the time we over at the beach in the south of France.

Submitted by PerryChase on June 8, 2007 - 8:57am.

I vote my ideals, my wallet be damned. The more you have, the more you should give back. That doesn't necessarily mean more taxes since the government can be very wasteful.

I believe in a world where people of all classes and backgrounds relate and are kind to one another.

I believe in doing the right thing, not the self-serving thing. And to me that means being a liberal.

Real estate wise, I despise gated communities. Architecture and urban planning should enlighten people's lives rather than separate people. We currently have dreadfully ugly urban planning. San Diego could be so much better.

-----
slackerboy, tu parles francais?

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 8, 2007 - 8:54am.

so I vote for fiscal conservatives that are socially liberal, mainly a Libertarian point of view

Ditto.

That said, I tend sway based on which front is being messed up more. Sadly, I often find myself voting the lessor of two evils.

Submitted by lostkitty on June 8, 2007 - 9:18am.

Slackerboy-

You are right. TAX & SPEND is a much better approach than borrow & spend. Tax & spend keeps things current.

Keeps it real. Makes even the common man want to understand/investigate/appreciate what is happening in his goverment, because it affects his wallet today......

I used to feel a little bristly when someone would talk about tax & spend liberals. But your comment makes me think of it in a new light. I am now PROUD of the TAX & SPEND LIBERAL cliche. Thank you.

Submitted by jg on June 8, 2007 - 9:23am.

Like Perry, I'm an idealist and never vote 'self interest.' My ideal is 'Traditional America' -- fiscally and socially conservative -- which has historically meant, 'Vote Republican.'

President Bush has shown himself to be an imposter; he fooled me. The Governator, I figured out, and refused to vote for him. I will not be fooled by McPain or Giuliani.

Go Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Fred Thompson!

Submitted by Ash Housewares on June 8, 2007 - 9:41am.

I vote for "leave me the hell alone." Don't force your beliefs on me, don't start wars in my name, don't tell me who I can/can't marry, and don't tax me any more than a bare minimum. So I'm a libertarian, but there's never a libertarian to vote for on election day. In the last two elections I supported the democrats- like others have said, it was a choice between my wallet and my social beliefs. Since I was a poor student, it was an easy choice- I had no money for them to take.

Submitted by OwnerOfCalifornia on June 8, 2007 - 9:55am.

I vote my wallet; the ideals fall in place naturally.

By voting your ideals you are inevitably forcing your world-view upon others who may not be compatible with your world-view. For liberals, this means the unfair confiscation of wealth and property for distribution as they see fit, in order to cure some perceived social ill. Ridiculous social engineering, thought-policing, and the suppression of free-expression result from their "ideals". For (neo-)conservatives, this means spreading "democracy" at the barrel of a gun, disastrous foreign policy, and intrusion into the personal lives and bedrooms of Americans.

So instead of tax-and-spend or borrow-and-spend, how about thinking outside of the box? How about neither? Vote your wallet, and the bloated Federal government, state and local governments will hopefully shrivel up to a more constitutional disposition. Everyone gets to keep their ideals to themselves without forcing them upon others.

Oh yeah, legalize the constitution, RON PAUL 2008!!!

Submitted by HereWeGo on June 8, 2007 - 10:36am.

Regrettably, of late, I seem to try to pick the "least worst" candidate.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 8, 2007 - 11:24am.

Mine is a protest vote . I vote for dead black people as write in candidates,usually Malcom X. They can't win and either can a libertarian ,independent, green or anybody else. Actually, I vote for whomever my wife wants. She gives me a peck on the cheek and for me that's more Justice than I will ever get for my values than I will get out of this Charade we call an electoral system and democracy.

Hello slackerboy.
I like your comments as well.

Perry,although you are much more eloquent than I am it appears we are in a simililar bind at election time being idealists. As a "liberal" You vote democrat always? You will be glad to know that is what I do for my peck on the cheek. My wife speaks french and spanish and loves "civil" debate. I think I will put her on the blog instead of me for your sake.She is also a real estate bear!

Submitted by lurkor on June 8, 2007 - 11:29am.

One distinction. Voting for small government economic policy is not necessarily voting for "your financial interests." It is for some people, but I for one actually believe that while the government should play some role in helping those who can't help themselves, govt intrusion into economic matters usually makes things worse for everyone, especially the poor, over the long haul. (Read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" for a brief overview of why I feel that way).

So I am in favor of fiscal conservatism (in the traditional sense) but it's not about protecting my own interests. I think it's in everyone's best long-term interests.

I have no problem if people disagree with this conclusion. I have a problem with people who think that because you are for limited govt, that you don't care about helping the poor. I'll bet i give more to charity than many of them do.

Submitted by Coronita on June 8, 2007 - 12:27pm.

I nominate Rich Toscano to run for office. We'll make sure he has "sufficient" campaign financing.

Submitted by SD Transplant on June 8, 2007 - 1:00pm.

Just a few days ago, I've answered to a phone poll to go over the state of the economy, political inclination, war on Iraq and so on...

I realized that I'm a scary hybrid:

1) I like a free economy (open - if there is such thing)because that's one of the reason I hated about comunism (I've lived in the Eastern block for 15 years under communism).......I woudn't want that back, yet I certainly miss some great things from that era (every system's got its perks)

2) However, I do see the need for some social protection and government fiscal responsability (stop ignoring DEBT, and bring a tax & spend attitude).

3) I realized that HealthCare is a mess in our country (the US)....I'm just 32, so I shouldn't think that hard about this matter......but I see/hear storries that make one reject the idea of the US in 2007 with people being turned down for medical treatment/best interest of patients is run by insurance and private hospitals.

4) The state of the Economy is my # 1 concern. I share the same concerns with the majority on the board about: (1) a decent place to live in a house I hope to afford soon....not to flip/speculate,(2) a decent way to invest more in my education in my future's familiy in this country (I don't have kids...but I do think ahead along with my wife). I am not asking for much, but I do feel that our middle class is being squeezed to extremes (feel the effect of unreported inflation, stagnate wages, opportunities)..I've done & felt economically better/safer in my 20's... (or was less informed)

5) The political state....disastrous:(1) politicians are too corupt by private interest (Corporations) to work in our best interest, (2) Democrats or Republicans.....more or less the same w/ actions - DIFFERENT speaches pre-election, (3)Voting for the best of the 2 evils does not make me feel any better about a way to change/impact America- my new home........I have republican ideas (conservative/fiscally responsable / small goverment) with a mix of social responsability (healthcare)....and liberal views (gay marriage isn't my priority)..... I think China and less likely Russia might show us what the new HYBRID of both worlds could do (social system w/ Economic interest "semi-Capitalism")...

6) Education: I've had great opportunities in the US, and I want to maintain this educational path. However, schools abroad are much harsher, require LESS or LITTLE $$$ to qualify young people to be educated.....Criteria in US top schools are more & more (who's your dady & what does he do/contribute)...less on the qualifications of these kids. One thing I know about schools outside..... exams are TOUGH/HARD..stressfull...and oustanding candidates have the edge vs. $$$

7) Immigration policy: it sucks....in plain English. We're caught in the political interest of Agro-industrial producers (who view cheap illegal labor easier to handle than innovation in new techonolgies to fix our thirst for these poor people). What's even more disturbing are the lax rules at our borders. I'm a legal immigrant and I have been living here for 12 years, but I would be the 1st to tell you that #1 If you don't speak English is not acceptable, #2 ignoring the immigration problem is just going to enhance this illness, and #3 we are experiencing a big problem with our ability to bring/keep/attract/ highly skilled folks here (with our quota system.....birocracy at our homeland security/immigration offices)...

Enough....I don't want to write essays....but It's hard to know whom to vote because the lesser of the 2 evils does not appeal anymore to me. However, I realize that a passive approach w/out political implication makes it worse. I'm a 1st generation legal immigrant here, so I don't want to give up....without thinking/understanding/choosing what's best for my adopted country....

Submitted by what_a_disasta on June 8, 2007 - 1:04pm.

I wish it mattered. There is nobody running that I could endorse. Democracy in the US is an illusion.

Submitted by drunkle on June 8, 2007 - 1:24pm.

"I wish it mattered. There is nobody running that I could endorse. Democracy in the US is an illusion."

ron paul. his social ideas are flawed, but at least he appears to be a constitutionalist.

in answer to the question... yes.

see, this question, money or social help is redundant. it takes money to pay for the programs, if you're not down for the programs, you're not down to spend money on them.

you will always be guided by your values in making such decisions. you can't simply say "i'm republican because i dont want taxes". you have to help pay for those functions that the government is suppposed to perform. it's the decisions on which functions are necessary that guides the money. not the other way around, nobody is interested in simply throwing money aimless around... or hording it at their own expense.

the primary difference in ideologies is that conservative wants the past or status quo. the liberal is forward looking and trying to prepare. it's framed perfectly by the global warming debate, conservatives are wait and see, liberals are study and prevent.

george bush's adventurism, his pre-emptive attack on iraq is exactly a liberal position, one that makes him a neo-con, a conservative fraud.

the difference between tax and spend or borrow and spend is moot. taxation is borrowing, borrowing is taxation. at least, for governments. framing the difference between cons and libs in this light misses the fact that they're still doing the same thing: spending your money on their toys.

etc etc etc.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 8, 2007 - 2:00pm.

"ron paul. his social ideas are flawed, but at least he appears to be a constitutionalist."

Dyed in the wool Republican on social issues but that doesn't really seem to matter much in an age of social gridlock.
Throw that negative out.

He will get killed in the prelims for being too "weak to defend" our way of life, read wealth, for his views on Iran ect.

If he makes it, I might vote for him on foriegn and monetary policy issues and forsake the traditional kiss I get from my wife for voting her way.

Submitted by drunkle on June 8, 2007 - 2:16pm.

i'd vote for him just on the basis that he's not trying to appeal to the moran next door, a la, george dumbofyou bush. he's an intellectual republican, go figure... definately in the wrong party.

Submitted by one_muggle on June 8, 2007 - 2:43pm.

I sey, yu ken raze mi taxxes if yu uze it two pay fer moore spelling lesonz. ;^)

-one muggle

Submitted by FormerSanDiegan on June 8, 2007 - 2:55pm.

SD Transplant -

If your list was a political party platform, sign me up.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 8, 2007 - 2:55pm.

I hear you drunkle. Morons and bible thumpers and a few intelligent people who admit they made a mistake got that guy in there.

Submitted by SD Transplant on June 8, 2007 - 3:28pm.

FSD,

I know the brainpower on this board could come up with better alternatives that our current government has to offer. Maybe...just maybe that's the beggining of an INDEPENDENT POLITICAL-ECON AGENDA BLOG... It's a sad state of affair in our country if folks like us are fed up with lack of honesty/transparency in our current Government, and the only way to allow our freedom of expression is just a blog (it's still a positive...but soon this blog power could be capitalized to gain more productive momentum).

Submitted by one_muggle on June 8, 2007 - 3:46pm.

I have not spent enough time reading their stuff, but the site Unity08 is trying to front a viable 3rd party via the web.
The requirements, as I understand them, are that the ticket (Pres. and VP) must either be non-politicians or a split ticket (Dem Pres., Rep VP OR vice-versa, and I assume (I) is ok).
It is a great idea, though I don't know how well it will work.

I say Mitt Romney and Clinton. When they touch it would be like matter and anti-matter. The energy created in their annihilation could power the world for decades!!!

E = MC^2 , where M=Mitt, C=Clinton.

-one muggle

Submitted by drunkle on June 8, 2007 - 4:54pm.

"the only way to allow our freedom of expression is just a blog"

the good ol days when your only creative outlet was the answering machine...

Submitted by NotCranky on June 8, 2007 - 5:17pm.

"I know the brainpower on this board could come up with better alternatives that our current government has to offer."

SD Transplant,
The curmudgeon to diplomat ratio in here is a little skewed in favor of the former and the rest of the crowd is pretty happy with one of the two camps that share power already.
No, we will have a different looking government when the next imperial force draws up the plans, "brain power" not with standing. There always the alternative possibility that we just anihilate the planet with nukes.

Submitted by PerryChase on June 9, 2007 - 8:51am.

Rustico, you did pretty well in the wife department. You have someone who is kind and well-educated. Someone who doesn't pressure you to buy her that dream castle. Sounds like you have a well put together family. I think that bilingual/multilingual kids have broader, healthier outlook on life.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 9, 2007 - 10:10am.

I have often thought we would be better off with a wise, benevolent and mild mannered King.

Perry For King :).

Submitted by drunkle on June 9, 2007 - 7:08pm.

"I have often thought we would be better off with a wise, benevolent and mild mannered King.

Perry For King :)."

bah. i've always thought i should be elected king. i would of course be benevolent, whether you liked it or not.

the fact that you use the term "benevolent king" is scary. are you stalking me?

Submitted by NotCranky on June 9, 2007 - 7:47pm.

"whether you liked it or not."
I think we will have to strike the mild mannered requirement for you drunkle. That is also why I left yours truly out.

"the fact that you use the term "benevolent king" is scary. are you stalking me?"

I don't get it and I don't see any smiley faces..put the damn smiley faces if you want to talk about stalking :).

Submitted by drunkle on June 10, 2007 - 10:32am.

nah, i'm all about the deadpan and messing with people. you're smart enough to see through it... people who *need* smilies deserve a good flogging with my benevolence. and it just so happens that Benevolence is the name of my beat stick.

and i dont think forcing benevolence down people's throat's is all that bad. we are, after all, talking about doing away with choice since people are apparently unable to make the right ones...

Submitted by NotCranky on June 10, 2007 - 11:00am.

Sorry to "out you" drunkle but you work for SDPD.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.