Voting for the party, not the candidate

We’ve all said at one time or another: I vote for the candidate, not the party.

This item in today’s Daily Oklahoman caught my eye. It’s on the editorial page and, of course, it gigs Democratic-leaning voters for making some, um, strange polling-place choices on Election Day. I get it, given the paper’s conservative tilt editorially. No problem with that.

http://newsok.com/scissortales-an-unusual-distinction-for-oklahoma-governor/article/5364590

An editorial brief in the Oklahoman┬árefers to a Democratic candidate for Congress who received 35,006 votes on Tuesday — even though he died in a car accident several days before the election. Then it refers to a Cleveland County commissioner candidate, another Democrat, who received 38 percent of the vote despite having been arrested three times for drunken driving.

The paper wonders whether party label mattered over candidate qualifications.

Good point.

But here’s another example of the point the Oklahoman was making.

Over here, in Potter County, a Republican candidate for justice of peace actually defeated a long-time Democratic incumbent even though the GOP challenger had been arrested multiple times in recent years on felony charges involving domestic disputes.

Does party affiliation matter more in this instance than a candidate’s actual qualifications?

I will┬ásay, with considerable emphasis, “yes.”

2 thoughts on “Voting for the party, not the candidate”

  1. Funny you bring up “voting for the party instead of the candidate.” In Randall County, over half of the Republican votes were Straight Party Ticket votes. An outstanding example of “VOTING FOR THE PARTY” not the Candidate. I doubt that the majority of those voters bothered to do any research on any of the races. They fall for the Republican line that if you are Anti-Choice, you MUST vote Republican!

Comments are closed.