Dem Issues/Dem Personalities; which are you more concerned about?

[blondeatlast]

Poll question: Dem Issues/Dem Personalities; which are you more concerned about?

This was mentioned in another thread I started, and I think it's an interesting and tough question we ought to all consider.

Which do you care more about--look inside yourself and be honest.

I purposefully am avoiding the "other" option as I feel it serves little or no purpose for this exercise.

Of course you may vote if you aren't a Dem.

[stray cat]

1. Personality is important to me in addition to just issues.

If I think a candidate is untrustworthy, unethical, unable to process information, unwilling to get advice, unwilling to take a stance and doesn't give a damn about everyday Americans I would be less willing to vote for him because I wouldn't trust him.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I voted personalities because

I think it's how we talk about our issues that is the sole problem, not our stances on them.

[mattclearing]

3. Totally personality...many of our reps have no core beliefs they

wouldn't gladly undermine for political gain.

[damntexdem]

4. The important things are the issues.

Personality affects getting legislation passed; but it's still secondary to the issues.

[mattclearing]

5. Also in winning elections. n/t

[Warpy]

6. I'm afriad class trumps both of those

as do core politics.

Right now we've got a plutocracy in Congress, men who have gotten too used to being overpaid as they schmooze with the ultra rich and are given soft bribes of corporate sponsored junkets to vacation spots no ordinary American can ever hope to afford. They have the best socialized medicine and platinum parachutes and don't have to reach retirement age for their pensions to kick in.

It's time to clean house, get rid of these men who may have started out with good intentions but who have gotten entirely too comfortable with living like sultans at the public's expense, and too disconnected from the public they're pledged to serve as the rich and the corporate have pretty much got their time and attention monopolized.

When you've got such a soft deal, you are loath to jeopardize it, which is why we've got such a lot of spineless old maids in pants in there now. It's why they're accepting DLC guidance on how to be drab, colorless and without conviction. On the other side of the aisle, you have men also starting out with good intentions who have found themselves beholden to Tom Delay for RNC support come reelection time, and we all know what that means.

If you don't have the government you want, it's time to start voting out the men responsible for it, the incumbents. Before you bring up the example of Ted Kennedy, ask yourself what speech he made yesterday when he stood up for our right to vote and have it counted.

[Zhade]

7. Fantastic answer.

NT!

[Stinky The Clown]

8. It is issues for me, personally, but I think it is about personality for

the majority of voters.

Issues, for many, are little more than white noise. Voters, the vast majority of whom - on both sides - are uniformed and happy to stay that way, seem to vote for political candidates in the same way they vote someone off the island, vote for the MLB Allstar rosters, or for the Golden Globes.

The ideal candidate would one who combines our basic values with a personality that meets the vogue of the day at each election.