Single-issue voters--I will NEVER understand them.

[raccoon]

Do you?

Why do these people think banning gay marriage or abortion is so important? Our economy is in the toilet and health care hit the wall a long time ago.

[xchrom]

1. lots of people here think of lgbtiq folk as single issue voters. nt

[southpaw]

4. I have a question

What do the I and Q at the end of LGBTIQ stand for.

I'm guessing the Q is 'queer' or maybe 'questioning', as I have seen LGBTQQ before.


Personally, I think that LGBT pretty much covers it, and the addition of superflous letters is getting rather silly.

Just the opinion of an SA.

[TechBear_Seattle]

9. Lesbian, gay, bi, trans, intersex, queer

When you see two Qs, one usually means "questioning."

Personally, I think the alphabet soup approach is annoying, as there is always some group that screams about being excluded. I would rather we had a single term that was all-inclusive; better yet would be to move society into a position where these labels are not necessary. But no one bothers to ask my opinion on the matter.

[patrice]

7. lgbt=/=lgbtiq? What is lgbtiq, please?

[southpaw]

2. Most single issue voters I know

are focused on taxes.

More specifically, they want their own taxes to be reduced and think that the repukes are the ones that will do it.

One guy in particular has said to me in no uncertain terms that he will vote for whoever will cut his taxes. Of course, he's still voting for McCain. He says he just doesn't believe Obama, and thinks the tax cuts are a lie... that Obama will raise everyone's taxes if elected, blaming his change in tax policy on something beyond his control (much like Bush 41 did).

When it comes down to it, the issue for many single issue voters is the R at the end of the candidate's name.

[Deep13]

45. "the issue for many single issue voters is the R at the end of the candidate's name"

I guess that makes me a single issue voter too since I almost never vote for any with that R next to his or her name.:-)

[zanne]

3. I think some people are very passionately anti-abortion....

Even though I'm pro-choice, I think I can understand that kind of single-issue voting. But something like taxes or guns? That makes me sick.

[mwb970]

8. That is exactly the idea I was about to post!

If someone truly, deeply believes that abortion equals murder, period, then they would be betraying themselves on a life-or-death, existential issue to vote for a pro-choice candidate. I have more respect for this stance than for a single-issue vote based on prejudice or ignorance, like regarding gays, guns, etc.

[mwb970]

15. On the other hand, it's difficult to respect *this*.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=79276

[slackmaster]

28. That's a classic No True Scotsman-type fallacious argument

a.k.a. Poisoning the Well, as is pretty much any statement by an individual claiming to speak on behalf of a large, diverse group.

[mwb970]

35. Whoa, you went over my head there.

You're probably right, but reading about No True Scotsman and Poisoning the Well on Wikipedia left me not understanding what they have to do with each other or the issue at hand. In fact, I'm not even sure if you are referring to my statement or the World Net Daily article! Elucidate?

[slackmaster]

37. Janet Porter's position, i.e. that no real Christian can vote for Obama, is fallacious

She's claiming to be the sole spokesperson for all of Christianity.

Her authority is false. She is poisoning the well by saying anyone who disagrees with her is not a true Christian.

No big mystery, I am just pointing out that falsely assuming authority on behalf of a group is a common type of false argument. It gets used by dogmatic people of all stripes.

I took a look at the definitions of No True Scotsman and Poisoning the Well in Wikipedia and found them obtuse.

Try Nizkor's logical fallacy list at http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

[slackmaster]

29. How is someone who truly believes homosexuality to be sinful different from someone who truly...

...believes that a fertilized egg has a soul, and is therefore deserving of the same legal protection as a neonate?

I see those positions both as expressions of belief in things that fundamentally cannot be proved or disproved.

[mwb970]

36. Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption.

I assumed that to these people the sin of (what they see as) murder is more severe than the "sin" of homosexuality. But I'm the first to admit that I actually don't know what they are thinking!

[slackmaster]

39. You may be right that they consider murder a bigger sin than homosexuality

The scary thing for me is that I think I actually do understand their thinking. For the most part it's not based on any kind of rational framework, although many of them will tell you that it's been "scientifically proved" that life begins at conception.

[mwb970]

41. That sounds like a matter of word definitions rather than "science", eh?

Does an airline "flight" "begin" when the plane starts taxiing or when it leaves the ground?

[slackmaster]

50. That depends on many things

Including whether or not the plane is on a moving conveyor belt. ;-)

[mwb970]

51. Or if it's part of a tachypomp!

As described here.

[hfojvt]

68. uh-oh taxes is kinda my issue

I think they should be progressive. But my issue goes beyond taxes to the budget, which is far more than one issue - there's HUD, food stamps, Liheap, headstart, and a myriad of other social programs and regulations. Guns could be a big issue to. My first hobby is genealogy. I spend lots of time and money on it. If I thought there was gonna be regulation restricting it somehow, then I probably would be up in arms about it too. Same thing with bicycling. Any candidate who proposed or voted for a mandatory helmet law and that would trump all other issues for me. That's stomping directly on my toes.

[ComtesseDeSpair]

5. No

I've had arguments with people who seem completely reasonable but hold firm to "gun rights" as their lone reason to vote Republican. It annoys the hell out of me. They'll be laying in a gutter clutching their unloaded guns to their emaciated chests after they've lost their job and their home and their unemployment payments thanks to those Republicans that they voted for... and they STILL won't admit that maybe they should vote for a Democrat.

[cabluedem]

11. Thats cause they need their guns to fight "socialists" when they come for them...

paraniod nutcases.

[Deep13]

19. I received an email from the local shooting club...

...with an "important message from the RNC." I wrote back saying I was not interested in anything the RNC has to say.

Most of the people who are members of that club are not exactly rolling in cash. It seems pretty short sighted to vote against health care, egalitarian tax structure, peace, conservation, education and a bunch of other things just so there won't be any more gun restriction.

[slackmaster]

30. The Democratic Party has taken a risky position by advocating more gun restrictions

IMO that is one reason the election will be anything but a landslide for Obama. I'm not thinking of the truly single-issue "gun" voters who are probably just unwilling to vote for a Democrat no matter what; there are people in the middle who will be swayed to vote for McCain because they see Obama's past positions as potentially threatening the sanctity and value of some of their treasured personal possessions.

Simply dropping the platform plank calling for a renewal of the silly "assault weapons" ban would have gained us a whole lot more votes than it would have cost. (I believe the latter figure would be essentially zero.)

[Deep13]

42. yup

[cabluedem]

6. Nope!

[iamahaingttta]

10. My boss is a single issue voter...

The ONLY thing he cares about are taxes.
He doesn't want to understand, however, that the tax policies he advocates are making it so that he won't have any customers soon.
He's pretty shallow...

[Deep13]

43. My in-laws wear the same set of blinders. nt

[liberal N proud]

12. They are idiots

[Fumesucker]

13. There are single issue voters on the Dem side as well..

The primary issue seems to be abortion rights.

Funny how that one energizes both sides base.

[TechBear_Seattle]

14. I've been accused of being a single-issue voter

As far as I'm concerned, my fundamental human rights is an absolute line in the sand: If you cannot or will not support my rights, then you are the enemy, pure and simple. To a lot of people, that makes me a "single-issue voter" trying to "destroy" the Democratic Party by "forcing an irrelevant wedge" into local, state and national politics.

:shrug: That is their problem, not mine.

[gollygee]

16. I could not vote for an anti-choice candidate

so I am a single-issue voter. Yes, I do think it is that important.

[jody]

17. One view is that some voters believe all rights enumerated and un-enumerated protected by our

Constitution are important but for personal reasons place a higher priority, perhaps only marginally higher priority, on one right than the others.

IMO once their highest priority right is no longer under attack by people who want to take away that right, then that person will select the next highest priority right and fight for it.

That makes sense to me although others will certainly disagree.

[Jim__]

18. There may be issues that would make me a single issue voter.

If one of the candidates made it clear that if elected, he would, say, attack Iraq; and the other would try not to, I think that issue alone would decide my vote.

I can see how it is possible for an issue to have overwhelming importance.

[onetiredmom]

20. Some believe

that if there is a choice between voting for your pocketbook, and voting for their social conscience, the latter wins. That if you don't vote for the moral fiber of the country, the rest won't matter in the long run. This line of thought was in an email I received earlier this week.

[Mari333]

21. It seems to be more about people seeing the grey areas

I have emphatically , albeit gently, suggested to my mother that abortion would be practiced much less in a society where there were good wages, job security, and social services. I have shown her that , for the last 8 years, Bush hasnt done much to stop abortion..why would he? The anti abortion voting bloc is essential to the GOP vote..Alas, my mother doesnt even believe in birth control, but I would have suggested to her that if young people were taught responsibility and had access to b control there would be far less abortions.
And she should know better. She voted for Bush both times on this issue, and has watched her SS funds pay for less and less as she struggles to pay for her meds and food. She always votes against her own best interests. She watched my sister struggle raising 5 kids on her own, and my sister benefitted greatly from WIC until she finally finished college and now has a new job.
So, my mother who gets SS and medicare, my sister who used WIC, will vote for McCain, yet they use the word socialist whilst still using social programs. It boggles the mind.
By the way, she doesnt like Bush at all now, but still wont budge on the abortion issue. The GOP is pretty good at promoting their propoganda on this subject.
I wish the american people had even an INKLING of what happens in Iraq, and actually SAW the everyday suffering and children dying..they live in such a bubble of denial . Perhaps the concept of pro life would take on a different meaning.
Until then, the GOP will continue to cast themselves as the party of high morals..all the while murdering children via wars, no health care, and poverty.

[lunatica]

22. There are single issues that will preclude me voting for someone

Because some issues have far reaching and profound consequences. For example, I won't vote for someone if they're against abortion or if they're anti-gay or anti any minority because those issues are about human rights and very near and dear to our Constitution. Anyone wanting to fuck with the Constitution, other than to add an Amendment that guarantees, in writing, that people of any color other than white, women and gays have equal rights and equal standing in all aspects of our society, including equal pay for equal work.

I will not vote for someone who is a Fundamentalist Christian Right Winger, a trickle down mouthpiece or pro-torture. So I guess if someone is just one of these things then I'm a single issue voter.

[Recursion]

23. You could vote for an anti-choice candidate?

If not, you're a single-issue voter.

Single-issue doesn't mean it's the only one they care about, it means that issue gets veto power over the rest.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

24. They are what they are.....

....and when you hear the anti-abortion ones go on and on about how they will never vote for a Democrat because of it, you realize why presidential elections are not always "in the bag".

They are generally people who work in jobs that they feel secure in, have no interest in going above their current economic bracket, don't own stock, and are ultra-religious enough to believe "God" will take care of them if they have a crisis either medical or financial.

[slackmaster]

25. I don't believe I could ever bring myself to vote for a young-Earth creationist candidate

I guess that makes me a single-issue voter.

[Le Taz Hot]

26. People vote their principles.

What's to understand? :shrug:

[bobbolink]

55. They also vote their prejudices.

[Marrah_G]

27. I can understand them- there are certain things that I would never vote for

If a candidate was against and wanted to abolish the separation of church and state.

If the candidate was Anti-GBLT.

Things like that.

[King Coal]

31. I would never vote for a republican. That is my single issue.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

32. There Are Single Issue Voters On Both Sides, And They're All Closed Minded Ignoramuses.

[Fumesucker]

54. So there is no single issue that would cause you not to vote for a candidate?

I find that hard to believe.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Nope. I'm Not That Closed Minded And/Or Selfish.

Two choices and only two choices: Repub or Dem. Regardless of any pet issues, the Dem is better for our country, our futures and our children hands down; every single time.

[slackmaster]

60. That certainly simplifies the process of picking your candidates

You don't even have to look at their names, much less their records, stated positions, etc.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

62. In Today's Political Environment? Absolutely.

Would you argue that the Dem would beat the Repub as it relates to what's best for our country overall, hands down?

[slackmaster]

66. No, I would not make such a blanket statement now or ever

Most of our systems are designed from the ground up to function as adversarial, two-party entities. If a single party comes to sole power it inevitably breaks down, becoming unresponsive and ultimately corrupt. This is basic human nature.

Destroy the opposition party, and you sow the seeds of destruction for our own party.

I have always, and will always, give consideration to every candidate who qualifies for office. It may take only a few seconds for me to dismiss some of them (see my initial reply regarding young-Earth creationists OF ANY PARTY), but I have never given party affiliation much more consideration than race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. I cannot recall ever choosing one candidate over another because he or she was a Democrat and the other a Republican (or Green, or Libertarian, or whatever). There is always enough to distinguish one from another if you are willing to do the work to find out.

Maybe it's because I grew up in a split household so I am able to see things through more than one lens, but I'd put my (now ex-) Republican mom in office before just about anyone else in the world.

I sure as hell am not going to vote for someone who I know for a fact to be crooked.

[endthewar]

33. What if the single issue was something like the Iraq War?

Closed minded? :eyes:

[raccoon]

34. Well, in that case, I might. However, don't let it be forgotten that

in 1968 or 1972 a certain candidate had a "secret plan" to end the Vietnam War.

The US pulled out in 1975.

[endthewar]

38. So you're okay with single-issue voters, just as long as they agree with your position.

Right, got it. :crazy:

[slackmaster]

40. One person's single issue is another person's obvious, unquestionable moral imperative

Or something like that.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

61. What about defending abortion rights, fixing the economy, gay rights etc.

No single issue is more important than all the others put together. Single issue voting, even if you're right about the issue in question, shows lack of perspective.

[endthewar]

65. Cindy Sheehan is a single-issue voter

I'm looking forward to your diatribe as to how ignorant she is with her "lack of perspective".

[Donald Ian Rankin]

71. I don't have anything to say you won't have heard before

But, yes, Cindy Sheehan, while clearly a good person, is not someone I would recommend looking to for political wisdom, I'm afraid. I pity her, but I don't have a high opinion of her judgement.

[bobbolink]

44. I understand it. I are one.

For my whole voting life, I've been there to support all sorts of issues---things that had no personal connection to me, but just because it was THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

For a lot of years now, I've seen that poverty isn't important to any but the smallest "special-interest groups", and there is NO effort within the Democratic party to make it a big issue.

Poverty isn't even MENTIONED on most lists of priorities by "progressives", let alone be considered close to the top.

So, I could either ignore MY OWN BEST INTERESTS, or I can be an advocate for ME.

If candidates can't speak to poverty, address us and invite us in, then to hell with them.

If we're going to be invisible, then don't count on us to be there for you any longer.

Yes, I've been forced to become a ONE-ISSUE VOTER.

[raccoon]

47. Excellent point.

"Poverty isn't even MENTIONED on most lists of priorities by "progressives", let alone be considered close to the top."

Sadly, in this day and time, I can't imagine a presidential candidate either R or D having it high on their list of priorities.

Thinking of LBJ's "War on Poverty"---it seems incredible now. How times have changed. Silly me, I used to believe they'd always change for the better.

[bobbolink]

48. Thank you for hearing me. I'm so very tired of being attacked.

All the deaths, because poverty isn't a sexy issue, and "progressives" can be bothered.

So, they have to attack those of us who dare to confront the issue.

Thank you.

[Orsino]

59. Confronting is good.

There is a place, though, for strategic voting that build a future for the position you really want. I think that progressive change is much more possible with Dems in power than under Republican rule.

I can probably be bought by promises for more progressive tax policies and jobs, in the short run. These things would have a generally positive effect on poverty, and set the stage for what we really want.

But there's a great danger in letting any candidate take any of our votes for granted. They need to know that many of us are single-issue voters, and they'd better get the basics right.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

57. There's More To The World Than Just You.

So who are you voting for then, if I may ask?

And would it EVER be in your best interests to have a republican elected in place of a Democrat? Just curious your thoughts.

[codjh9]

46. Yes! Like I've NEVER voted because of my wallet, which is anathema to Repubs. n/t

[Jed Dilligan]

49. I'm a single-issue voter.

I vote against the Republican corruption, racism, and death platform.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

52. I am Democrat who would bolt...

if the Dem candidate came out as anti-choice and said they would actively work to overturn Roe and make abortion illegal.

Sorry, but I will not give my vote to someone who would take away the fundamental rights of some 51% of the population. :shrug:

[Orsino]

58. There are deal-breakers, and that's probably one of them.

I won't risk letting any Republican nearer to power, but I suppose there are circumstances that cold make me abstain.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. No Dem Candidate Would Ever Come Close To Making It Through The Primaries.

So not really a very likely scenario.

[slackmaster]

69. I guess you have never heard of Senators Bill Nelson and Bob Casey

:nuke:

[southernleftylady]

53. Well as a rape survivor who had an abortion I will NEVER vote for someone who is ..

anti choice....
call me whatever you want.. I can not do it.. sorry

[aikoaiko]

64. I think its a matter of candidaites having necessary, but not sufficient stances on issues

as opposed to having a single issue.

[dkofos]

67. Don't bother trying to understand them.

THEY ARE FUCKING STUPID!!

[LanternWaste]

70. What's the appropriate number of issues...?

What's the appropriate number of issues...?

[hay rick]

72. phone bank impressions

Top single issue voter issue- abortion. By a mile.
Clear number 2- guns.

I haven't had anybody bring up the subject of gay marriage- pro or con. Maybe the anti-abortion people just don't get around to mentioning it since I take "abortion is murder" remarks as a cue that I'm wasting my time and need to get on to the next call. That said- it isn't clear to me that one belief implies the other.