NowThis Politics

LTC (Join to see) - I agree, which is why I advocate having a voters guide where the candidates spell out their positions on a wide variety of important topics. That said, I think the term "party line vote" means different things in different states. In Washington State, the candidates' party affiliations are listed for all partisan positions, but there's way to vote for the party line without voting for each individual candidate. I have voted in several other states over the course of my lifetime, though, and at least one of them had a single box you could check that would cast your entire ballot for one party. You're right, when I used that box to vote, I got lazy.

SSgt Christopher Brose - Well ... what you describe ... one box check votes all of whatever party you checked ... is the only definition I know of for a party line vote on a ballot. There are a lot of positions below the federal level that are included in that party line vote ... depending on state and locale. Judges and sheriffs in particular. I don't have a problem with a voter's guide at all ... as long as it is provided by individuals or parties. It isn't the government's job, nor should it be, to provide it.

LTC (Join to see) - In Washington, the state provides a very good voter's guide. It allows candidates to speak for themselves. And it has an outstanding section on initiatives and referendums when there are those measures to vote on. There is an argument for and argument against, and a rebuttal of argument for and rebuttal of argument against, as well as the text of the measure itself. And the people who write the arguments and rebuttals, and their affiliations, are clearly identified.

I have a lot of gripes with the state of Washington, but this is something they got very right.

SSgt Christopher Brose - We may be talking past each other here. The content of what you refer to as a voter's guide is not written by the state ... but by the candidates or proponents of the measures up for vote. I'm ok with that. The state is providing the platform ... those on the ballot or promoting measures on the ballot are providing the content. I don't think that any state or the federal government has an obligation to do that ... but as long as all the state is doing is compiling responses to questions or providing a platform for presentation of positions, I can't see the harm from doing so ... as long as it does not censor or edit input.

I remember the members of Congress standing at Barry’s veranda with violins and mandolins begging him to please work with them.

I no mean dat