Ann.without.an.e Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) I don't want this to turn into a political thread. I have heard many on my FB page say that one issue will make or break a vote for them - be that immigration, abortion, what we do with refugees, etc. Is there one issue that your vote hinges on or do I have unusual FB feed? You don't have to expound on it, I am just curious - a yes or no in a poll will do. Thanks Edited October 10, 2016 by Attolia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Girls' Mom Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. I feel that our government is far too complex for that. 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann.without.an.e Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. I feel that our government is far too complex for that. See - me too, but so many are staying for against a particular side over one issue they hold dear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post regentrude Posted October 10, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) I voted no if you are thinking of immigration, abortion etc. OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. Edited October 10, 2016 by regentrude 59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann.without.an.e Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 I voted no if you are thinking of immigration, abortion etc. OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. :lol: that is deeper than I was thinking. If that is the case then most of us are probably one issue voters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) Yes and no - I have a few non-negotiobles whereby I cannot vote if they aren't upheld, but it's not the only thing I consider, it's just basic qualifications for office and a box that needs checking for me to be morally capable of the most minimal support. There are plenty of people checking the boxes who I still don't support, but those issues are level one acceptability criteria in the way I rank candidates. If someone was otherwise perfect but failed on these principles it would make them highly inconsistent at best. Edited October 10, 2016 by Arctic Mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 ladybugs Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I am not saying I am a 1 issue voter, but there is one issue that if they are on the other side, they would have to be near perfect with everything else for me to consider voting for them. However, I don't see any candidate having all the other things I look for and not have the one issue too. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daria Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I said "yes", but I think that's an exaggeration. I work with people with disabilities, and am a parent and a sibling to people with disabilities. I feel very strongly that the way a candidate talks about and plans for people with disabilities is an indicator of the way they value human lives, and human rights. In addition, because of my work, I feel more able to evaluate a candidate's stance on issues of disability than I do on issues of foreign policy or the tax code. Now, having said that, if a candidate turned out to be racist and misogynistic and Islamophobic, and strongly supportive of disability rights and community living, well then I'd have to reconsider their support, but I've never met such a person. In my experience people who are afraid of, angry at, or dismissive of people who are different from them aren't usually the best advocates for disability rights. 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forty-two Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 One issue is enough to *break* my vote, but it alone isn't enough to *make* my vote. I have a "litmus test" issue - if a candidate is against it, then that's enough to remove them from consideration for me. But among the candidates that are for it, then I look at other things to decide who to support. (In an ideal world, anyway. Candidates who pass my litmus test are thin on the ground right now - the idea of being able to choose between several seems like an unattainable luxury, and of the few who do, most have a host of other issues that collectively break them. I mostly just don't have a candidate because of it.) 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinivanMom Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Until this election, I didn't realize that there were actually single-issue voters out there. In recent months, I have not only had multiple people tell me that their vote hinges on a single issue, but many of those same people are incredulous that anyone would consider any other issue when deciding how to vote. To them it is the one and only issue. I find that kind of black & white, laser-focus to be both surprising and fascinating. I am not a one issue voter. Democracy, government, politics, and morality are too complex for that. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amira Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No, I'm not. But there are a few things that I can't forgive in a candidate, unless the other candidate has more unforgivable stances. Fortunately, I've never had to deal with that, although it could happen if we never change the electoral system to get rid of the two-party monopoly. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. I'm with you here! Normally there are several issues I care about and I have to decide which ones I care about the most in order to vote as no candidate ever agrees with me on everything (sigh), so I voted no in the poll. This year is different. This year I'd vote for a "yet to be determined" candidate over the option I'm not voting for - due to that competent/personality bit - so I suppose I might have voted incorrectly in the poll. This year - for Pres - that's my single issue. Without competency/personality, nothing else matters. For all other races, I'll be at my normal point of picking and choosing which issues are most important to me in this election. Edited October 10, 2016 by creekland 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaeFlowers Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I voted yes. But, it depends on the election. For this particular election, it really had boiled down to one thing for me. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 One issue is enough to *break* my vote, but it alone isn't enough to *make* my vote. I have a "litmus test" issue - if a candidate is against it, then that's enough to remove them from consideration for me. But among the candidates that are for it, then I look at other things to decide who to support. (In an ideal world, anyway. Candidates who pass my litmus test are thin on the ground right now - the idea of being able to choose between several seems like an unattainable luxury, and of the few who do, most have a host of other issues that collectively break them. I mostly just don't have a candidate because of it.) Well stated - that's what I was trying to say as well. The phrase 'litmus test' was escaping me :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkyandtheBrains. Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I voted no if you are thinking of immigration, abortion etc. OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. This is the kind of one issue voter I am. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6packofun Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I don't think anyone is truly a one-issue voter. However, there tends to be one or two issues that a voter might feel that other issues hinge upon, or one that says the most about the candidate's character or judgment. I do not think morality is as complex or fluid as many would like it to be. Choosing between immoral candidates is a real challenge, though. I've been thinking a lot about the whole "voting one's conscience" thing, that's for sure! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teachermom2834 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I didn't realize I was until this election. But I have found that I am. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Like Regentrude and Creekland, I have never, ever been a single issue voter to this point, and a moderate independent which means my voting - in terms of parties - has always been a bit of an eclectic mix. Seems these days competence - as in not likely to get us involved in another war and potentially one that involves nukes - may be the rule of the voting box for me. Sigh.... But, there are lots of state and local races, bond issues, school things, etc. in which I will be back being a not single issue voter. We have a sheriff's race, judges at the district and state level, representatives, and such so lots of things to consider. Sometimes it seems like the presidential race is the only thing going on, but it really isn't, and our government is not a dictatorship so it is important to keep an eye on the ball of what all the other politicians stand for and plan to attempt to accomplish. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I voted no if you are thinking of immigration, abortion etc. OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. Or the Facebook meme that says "I'm a single issue voter, and that issue is not ushering in the apocolypse". In which case, sure. 32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpleowl Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 There is one issue that is, in general, more important to me than other issues. But there have been times when the candidate I agreed with on that issue had enough other problems that I voted for the other candidate instead. There have also been times when neither candidate held a position I felt was sufficiently close to mine on that issue. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 In a normal election year, there is a "dealbreaker" issue. This year, however, I'm voting for a 3rd party candidate whom I disagree with over the "dealbreaker" issue simply because I cannot in good conscience vote for the candidate who is claiming to be in agreement with my position. The 3rd party candidate is for the status quo, which is bad but better than the other major party's stated desire to change the law in a significantly worse direction. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. I know a whole lot of people who are, though. Usually abortions (apparently we're heading down the path of being able to murder kids up to one year old so we'd better stop all abortions now - someone seriously said that!). My aunt votes for whomever the Catholic Standard (I think that's what it's called - it is definitely Catholic something) endorses. She's almost 80 and is proud to have never learned anything about politics, but has voted in every election. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Not normally, no. This year I've discovered that my single issue is "I don't want that person to win", so.... 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 My aunt votes for whomever the Catholic Standard (I think that's what it's called - it is definitely Catholic something) endorses. She's almost 80 and is proud to have never learned anything about politics, but has voted in every election. At least she has something legit to base her opinion off of (whether I agree with it or not). I know someone who truthfully told me she votes for the candidate with the best smile. This was prior to the upcoming election and I've lost track of her over the years, so I don't know if that's still true this year or not, but honestly? That's the #1, top of my list, for huh??? and :svengo: when it comes to elections in my IRL experiences. There are plenty I've disagreed with over the years, but that one is in its own dimension. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I'm not, but I have friends who sort of are in this election. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seasider Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I might better be called a weighted-issue voter. There are some issues much more important to me than others, and I understand that I might have to cast my vote with an attitude that a partial-victory is acceptable. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. I know a whole lot of people who are, though. Usually abortions (apparently we're heading down the path of being able to murder kids up to one year old so we'd better stop all abortions now - someone seriously said that!). Euthanasia for disabled babies under the term "post-birth abortion" is a real thing that certain "bioethicists" are calling for: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughCollie Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I am not a single-issue voter. However, this time around my interest has narrowed its focus considerably. I will not vote for a particular candidate no matter who runs against him or her. I will vote for that candidate's opponent no matter what. What matters to me now is that the particular candidate does not win the election. So that's my single issue. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greta Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No, the issues that decide my vote depend a lot on the office that I'm voting for. For example, I have a lot of friends who are one-issue voters across the board. But their one issue (even though it's one that I agree with them on) does not have much influence at all on who gets my vote for the office of president. Because this particular issue is one that is primarily decided by state legislators, and very rarely comes up for the president at all! So to me it makes no sense to let that be a major factor, much less THE deciding factor, for my vote for that particular office. There is another issue that is hugely influential in who gets my vote for president, because I've seen dramatic differences in the way the rest of the country is influenced and affected in this regard when the president is of one party versus the other. So for me, though this particular issue isn't necessarily important to me than the other one (they're actually intertwined though I don't think people really stop to think about that), it's a much bigger (MUCH bigger!) factor in who I vote for for that particular office. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mom2scouts Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Or the Facebook meme that says "I'm a single issue voter, and that issue is not ushering in the apocolypse". In which case, sure. I saw a church sign today that said, "Jesus is coming! Hopefully it will be before the election." :lol: 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Most of the single issue voters I know do not admit that they are single issue voters. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann.without.an.e Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 Most of the single issue voters I know do not admit that they are single issue voters. Really? I have heard so many people say they don't like a particular male candidate but they can't vote third party or for the other candidate because of a particular issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Really? I have heard so many people say they don't like a particular male candidate but they can't vote third party or for the other candidate because of a particular issue. This year is different and I hear more people embracing the term than I ever did before. Still, most people I know who really do have just one issue they focus on at least try to pretend they are thinking more broadly when they vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamiof5 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Yes I am. There's one issue that is a no brainer for me, and will not vote for a candidate who goes against it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassenach Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 In a normal election year, there is a "dealbreaker" issue. This year, however, I'm voting for a 3rd party candidate whom I disagree with over the "dealbreaker" issue simply because I cannot in good conscience vote for the candidate who is claiming to be in agreement with my position. The 3rd party candidate is for the status quo, which is bad but better than the other major party's stated desire to change the law in a significantly worse direction. I'm voting 3rd party to register my complaint. I debated write in, but I think being registered one party, but voting 3rd will be more effective. I will admit that I haven't exhaustively examined the candidate I am voting for. I know enough to know I kind of sort of align. We all know who is winning California anyway. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemiSweet Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I am not, the world is much too complex to hinge everything on one issue. Certainly there are many issues that weigh more heavily than others for me though. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I can't be, because life isn't black and white. What if it was Hitler versus say, Carter, but Carter was pro choice and Hitler was pro-life. I'm not going to vote Hitler just over that one issue, no matter how important it is for me. Obviously an oversimplification, but it's why I'm not one issue. Jesus wasn't one issue. I'm not either. 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaceyinLA Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I voted no, but in cases where a candidate is super extreme on a subject that's extremely important to me, it's likely that would push me to the other candidate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnificent_baby Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Yes and always will be. I vote for the pro-life candidate no matter what. IMO, the unborn is the most vulnerable population. The other issues, although also important, are secondary to me. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. There are too many things that matter. I would normally take a candidate who has the overall picture matching my ideals; i can normally let go of the one or two things I really wish candidate would line up with me but doesn't. This election, though...not quite typical... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirrellyMama Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 There is one issue that is, in general, more important to me than other issues. But there have been times when the candidate I agreed with on that issue had enough other problems that I voted for the other candidate instead. There have also been times when neither candidate held a position I felt was sufficiently close to mine on that issue. I voted yes, but have to agree with this. There is one issue I do find more important than others, but will vote against a candidate if they are a disaster is other ways. Kelly 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No. However, there are some dealbreakers that take a candidate out of my consideration. Anti-abortionists are automatic write-offs, as is anyone who spouts religion publicly or has Monsanto in their pockets. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 No, I wouldn't say that, but I can think of single issues which a candidate might believe that would just make it impossible for me to support him or her. And if I thought the person was incompetent, or really just an immoral person, those things would be a deal-breaker. I do think that for some people wo are single issue voters, it is because they see that issue as in some way revealing a whole belief system rather than because they think that is the only issue. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 (edited) I voted no if you are thinking of immigration, abortion etc. OTOH, "competent candidate for presidency" is also a single issue. In that sense, I am a single issue voter. I will have to agree there. :lol: I wasn't a single issue before but now I find I am. Edited October 11, 2016 by Slartibartfast 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xahm Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 I try to vote based on a candidate possessing good judgment and being prepared. The president will have limited ability to institute policy changes without congressional support but is sure to face unexpected challenges at home and abroad. For this reason I will happily vote for someone I frequently disagree with if I trust that person to make good decisions in an emergency and work across party and international lines when something must get done. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 need a "depends". when it came to a state auditor actually auditing with accountablity - yes, I was a one-issue voter. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarenNC Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 (edited) I have not always been a one-issue or even one-party voter, but it seems to me that the political parties are moving increasingly toward being one-extreme-set-of-issues parties (both to some extent, but one much more than the other IMO). Add to that the extreme gerrymandering which leaves most local and state candidates running without truly viable competition, and there's not a lot of political pressure for candidates to move toward or stay in the middle (in fact, quite the opposite). That makes it really difficult to be able to vote a mixed ticket with much confidence. I would love to see a requirement for all states to have a requirement for nonpartisan boards to make the district line decisions, as neither party seems to be able to handle this responsibly. Maybe that would give us more candidates who are willing to actually do their jobs of working together to lead the city/county/state/country, rather than grandstanding to impress their party-mates. My most recent vote across party lines really soured me on the idea because that particular candidate had a history of being a moderate and willing to work with both parties in a lower office, only to become much more extreme and unwilling to compromise as soon as the election was over. I felt it was a very disheartening bait-and-switch. Edited October 11, 2016 by KarenNC 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artichoke Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 No. For me, it's a mixture of the issues. I tend to vote across party lines, selecting the person whom I think is best for the job. I do have to say, however, that this presidential election has made one of my key issues a huge NO for the other opponent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 All the people in this thread who are saying they have a dealbreaker issue are, to me, single issue voters. I mean, to me, what that means is that if you agree 90% with one candidate but disagree about the dealbreaker, you'll vote for the candidate that you only agree with maybe 50% on instead. I think that's the very definition of single issue voting. I don't consider myself a single issue voter. This election is odd in that personality is playing such a huge role. I can't think of any issue that I wouldn't vote for someone - assuming that they held a position that was within the common range of positions (and not, say, a super extreme position that is not held by hardly any mainstream major party politicians) that I would actual vote against the person that I thought was either more competent or more in line with my views overall. I wouldn't even say I'm a competence single issue voter... I've voted for third party candidates that I didn't think were the most qualified for the job just because I thought it was important to send a message. It really depends on the race and my views of it. I do vote based on different issues more depending on the race. I feel it's pretty important to vote for a presidential candidate who agrees with at least some of my stance on foreign policy because the president has massive power over our foreign policy. It's less important to me that I vote for a president who agrees with me on, say, education policy or prisons or drug policy or abortion or a number of other things that the president, yes, has power over, but which the legislative and judicial branches have a lot more power over. On the other hand, if it's a local race, I might not care what the candidate thought of some national policy or other. I mean, if I agree with what they're planning to do with the schools or trash collection or something, that's more important than when they spouted their mouth off on some national or international issue I disagreed with them on. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 All the people in this thread who are saying they have a dealbreaker issue are, to me, single issue voters. I mean, to me, what that means is that if you agree 90% with one candidate but disagree about the dealbreaker, you'll vote for the candidate that you only agree with maybe 50% on instead. I think that's the very definition of single issue voting. I disagree. A single issue voter is one looking for the candidate who meets their opinion on one single issue, i.e. that there is ONE single issue that determines worthiness of vote for that voter. Also, you're making the US-centric assumption that there are only two possible choices. Most other countries have a bit more variety of candidates to consider. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.