97 percent of voters vote for R or D regardless of if it is actually the best choice.

In this example I am not not talking about the presidency, senate or house. I do present the Missouri State Auditor race as an example.
Responsibilities of the Missouri State Auditor's Office

The State Auditor's Office is Missouri's independent watchdog agency. Article IV, Section 13 of the Missouri Constitution describes the duties and responsibilities of the State Auditor. The State Auditor’s Office works to ensure the proper use of public funds and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Missouri government by performing audits of state agencies, boards and commissions, the circuit court system, the counties in Missouri that do not have a county auditor, and other political subdivisions upon petition by the voters. These audits examine financial accountability, waste, opportunities for fraud, and whether government organizations and programs are achieving their purposes and operating economically and efficiently. All audits are performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. The State Auditor also provides an annual audit of the state’s annual comprehensive financial report and federal grant programs administered by the state, reviews and registers general obligation bond issues of the state’s political subdivisions, prepares fiscal notes for ballot initiatives, performs an Annual Forfeiture Report, and reviews property tax rates proposed by political subdivisions for compliance with state law. The State Auditor's Office performs annual financial audits of the state's financial statements and the Office of the State Treasurer, and annually audits compliance with federal requirements applicable to major federal programs of the state. The State Auditor serves as a member of the State Records Commission and as an ex officio member of the Joint Committee on Transportation Oversight. Responsibilities are carried out in accordance with the vision, mission and values described in the State Auditor's Strategic Plan.

There were three candidates running for Missouri State Auditor.
Democrat Alan Green: Education and experience
Republican Scott Fitzpatrick: His Story
Libertarian John Hartwig: Info

Hartwig has a BA in accounting. The other two do not. Hartwig is the only one of the three that is a CPA. And Hartwig has been a CPA for 50 years. In fact, Hartwig has his own CPA practice.

From my first link above:

All audit management staff are CPAs

Green and Fitzpatrick are not CPAs but Hartwig is. Hartwig has, by far, the most experience pertaining to State Auditor. Yet, Hartwig got 2.99% of the vote. Election results

Why did Missourians not elect Hartwig? I think it is because voters are so beat down and conditioned that they think they have to vote against the other major party. Democrats vote democrat just to keep the republicans out of office and republicans vote republican just to keep the democrats out of office. Neither side actually thinks about the most qualified choice. It is like over 97% of voters have tunnel vision and do not care about anything but their side winning.

You screwed up Missouri. The most experienced candidate was not elected. All voters (in Missouri and elsewhere) need to open their eyes and THINK for themselves.

Good luck trying to convince people to take their right to vote seriously. We live in the age of no personal responsibility. It would take an amount of responsibility to understand who they are voting for. It's easier to just join a tribe and go with whatever they throw out there.

It's not just politics, how many people are very brand centric??

a reply to: Blueracer

I like that you spent the time to create this topic. For a while now I have argued that the best thing for this country to change course in the right direction would be to eliminate political parties entirely and have voters choose a candidate based on the issues and where the candidate stands. We will usually not agree with a candidate on all the issues so it would be up to the voter to prioritize what they feel strongest for or against, but such a system would engage the voter and present better candidates to represent the people.

a reply to: americanbuffalo1
It is my hope that this thread, highlighting this example, causes someone, even if just one person, to think for themselves before voting next time. I see a lot of the R or D only mentality right here on ATS.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: Blueracer

I like that you spent the time to create this topic.

Thank you.

a reply to: Blueracer

I'm a Republican who voted for Barack Obama in 2008.

He has been the only deviation since I started voting in 1980, however.

a reply to: drewlander
wow, I typically avoid political threads but this one makes sense.
I've wondered for a long time why we even have 2 partys, it just creates division and bias.
It would be nice to be just americans, do some research before we vote, then vote for whoever shares your view or visions.
(sigh)

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: Blueracer

I like that you spent the time to create this topic. For a while now I have argued that the best thing for this country to change course in the right direction would be to eliminate political parties entirely and have voters choose a candidate based on the issues and where the candidate stands. We will usually not agree with a candidate on all the issues so it would be up to the voter to prioritize what they feel strongest for or against, but such a system would engage the voter and present better candidates to represent the people.

Simply removing party affiliation and letters before names on a ballot would remedy just that.

Simple.

a reply to: carewemust

So you voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 and over 99.9% for republicans. This thread is for you too.

Specific candidacies aside, this problem is one that I believe stems from generations "consumer training" and media-inflated partisanship... Teaching people that "teams" matter more than issues and setting up social conditions where we vilify one another for choices we deem 'contrary' is obviously a bad thing. The proof is in our faces.

This problem is not unique to the United States. Everywhere that political "choices" are a social metric we see that analysis and debate were artificially 'devolved' by conditioning.

We don't teach or even discuss how rhetoric and debate tactics deflect reason, how groups of "good people" become more and more where "bad people" hide. How the best sloganeering, and recasting of narratives can camouflage questionable protocols and policies. How the "entertainment" value propaganda is often used to secure support, while simultaneously creating a vacuum of discussion. And the 21st century can boast that the exploitation of social manipulation through mass media is an effective way of disenfranchising resistance without the need for persuasion through reason.

The next phase to secure the powerful control over people "motivations" has to do with inhibiting communications... each of us must determine whether this is true from our own perspective, before proceeding to address it. You may find that most "won't" accept it.

a reply to: Maxmars
I'd give you applause if I could. Well stated.

100% this is the issue. People are voting all republicans or democrats.

I think a test should be given. Random questions on each candidates policies. Questions that are easy to answer if you read a paragraph about each candidate.

If you fail the test, you don't get to vote for said position.

Itd be hard to implement fairly, but i think we'd get a lot better elected officials and maybe not so many would vote straight red or blue.

a reply to: Blueracer

I always research or I don't vote in that race. Period. I wish more people would research.

Both democrats and Republicans have spent the last 20 years demonizing the Libertarian party because they know if the majority of people would simply research their ballots before casting their vote, they would probably vote Libertarian much of the time.

But as you said, most people just walk in and click for a certain party and never think more about it. That's why we are stuck with no good politicians election after election until they die, and then some of them are even voted in after death.

That said I would have to think hard about Hartwig because he must be in his 70s if he was a CPA for 50 years and I am tired of these elderly politicians.

Excellent Post BTW

originally posted by: Blueracer
a reply to: carewemust

So you voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 and over 99.9% for republicans. This thread is for you too.

For real.. lol. I think a lot of people would vote mixed if they just took time to look beyond the simplistic party lines.

Personally, i think party status should be banned and mentioning if you're repub or democrat gets you banned from election candidacy.

Imagine how hard it would be for people to blind vote and hate each other without partys.

a reply to: Walrus72

Agree. More people should vote mixed ballot if they bothered to think!

Have you ever polled one your friends or family on a policy and then informed them their policy fits more with the other Party than the one they typically vote for? I've done it a bunch of times in the last 10 years or so and I am amazed how many simply don't care. They will wrap themselves in knots to explain why they will still vote for their guy because blah blah blah.

I understand sometimes one policy doesn't align with a certain party and your other policies all do so you vote for the one closest, but I've had people where their top 2 or 3 align more with another party and they still vote their tribe anyway.

a reply to: Blueracer

Dude what U talkin bout?

This time it will be different.

Clearly we must get back our country by supporting the guy/gal/it that wears a "L" or a "R" even though they work for the same people with the same agenda and plans.

Stop being a jerk and Forget the end goal or actions of the parties and politicians. We must vote for the one that tells us what we want to hear. its the best way to get back control of our gov't .

Wake up man its always the OTHER party that causes the issue and while ours is corrupted as Fk we must never bring focus to that, because our politics is now a religion. It blasphemy to question your own candidate and party.

Being focused on the wrong doings of the OTHER candidate and OTHER party where we have zero influence to make a difference is the best way to go about it. Its been working out perfectly for us.

Why the hell would you want to try something different?

As corn pop once stated " Change is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"



C'mon man. The 2 parties have solved all our problems. Its not like we have had the same issues for decades over decades. We need to be patient and give them another century to solve the problems that have already existed for over a century under their control.

Why in the world would you want to try something different when its been working out so great and only getting better? Thats crazy talk. Weirdo

a reply to: drewlander

No it wouldn't, they would lie to get your vote just as they do now. The only difference is not only would they not fill their campaign promises, they just wouldn't have a mechanism to attempt to fill them.

Literally the only positive change that can happen is people themselves becoming principled. It is not going to happen. We are creatures of advantage, always have been always will be, no matter the fairytales of altuism people tell of on their facebook page.

originally posted by: americanbuffalo1
Good luck trying to convince people to take their right to vote seriously. We live in the age of no personal responsibility. It would take an amount of responsibility to understand who they are voting for. It's easier to just join a tribe and go with whatever they throw out there.

It's not just politics, how many people are very brand centric??

Those media personalities on Youtube, Tiktok, Twitch.tv, etc are called influencers for a reason. They talk about what they think (or what their sponsors suggest they talk about) and by proxy, that's what subscribers think because idol worship.