I'm lucky in that where I live, the candidate I agree with most and the party I agree with most coincide (and this looks like still being the case even with the candidate stepping down and being replaced).
Not sure what I'd do if that weren't the case. Probably vote for a party, because I think the party in power makes more difference than an individual candidate; but it would depend on how bad my party's candidate was or how good the opposing party's candidate was.
I did seek out my local candidates rather than relying on what they managed to put through my front door along with the daily dose of take away menues.
I guessed, and am genuinely curious if it would change anyone's mind.
I've usually voted with party in the past, and when I have looked at candidates they've been in line with the party message. This time is different though, and I'm still undecided at this stage.
Repeating word-for-word something I posted elsewhere:
My own existing MP, who represents my party-of-choice in a very safe seat, is standing down. None of the candidates this time round, including the new candidate for my party-of-choice, have made any particular effort to persuade me of anything at all, and none of them are people I've met or have heard of.
So while I've ticked "Candidate", above, I'll probably end up voting for the party.
His poll's answers are (currently) at variance with yours.
No idea what your politics are, but most parties pull resources out of safe seats these days; not enough campaigners, marginals too important. Roll on electoral reform.
I *vote* for the party, but I go out leafletting, canvassing etc only in areas with good candidates (have been in areas with extremely good Lib Dem candidates and also less-good ones). Of course, if we had STV, then the problem wouldn't occur ;)
Although I vote for a party (been trying to break the two-party hold on power all my voting life), I get pissed off with the widespread ignorance of how the system works, and such comments as "the unelected Prime Minister".
... and I hope the candidates can keep their parties in line and on track. I'm a relative newcomer to Interest in Politics and I was, therefore, shocked at how much Labour changed while they were in power. It seemed, not because the MPs had generally, individually changed from their original message but more because the party line had changed and the MPs had been bent to it by the party.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Not sure what I'd do if that weren't the case. Probably vote for a party, because I think the party in power makes more difference than an individual candidate; but it would depend on how bad my party's candidate was or how good the opposing party's candidate was.
no subject
no subject
Dear Reader
Re: Dear Reader
Re: Dear Reader
I've usually voted with party in the past, and when I have looked at candidates they've been in line with the party message. This time is different though, and I'm still undecided at this stage.
no subject
no subject
My own existing MP, who represents my party-of-choice in a very safe seat, is standing down. None of the candidates this time round, including the new candidate for my party-of-choice, have made any particular effort to persuade me of anything at all, and none of them are people I've met or have heard of.
So while I've ticked "Candidate", above, I'll probably end up voting for the party.
His poll's answers are (currently) at variance with yours.
no subject
no subject
No idea what your politics are, but most parties pull resources out of safe seats these days; not enough campaigners, marginals too important. Roll on electoral reform.
no subject
Of course, if we had STV, then the problem wouldn't occur ;)
no subject
Amasing how a crap candidate will suddenly find their activist base wondering off to find other target seats to work.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject