Since I have no idea who most of them are anymore I have to throw mental darts. Still no D's in the Oregon primary most of what matters and the ones that did show will probably get clobbered. Vote for the lone conteastants for judge, water board etc. and move on to the BIG FISHIES.

Have fun with finals. Remember flunkies make some of the best trolls.

I don't like the idea of voting for a politician based on personal characteristics, like the ones you've described above, because it tends to favor older candidates. They've held public office longer, and there is generally more known about them.
Also, character voting is usually code for Christian Family Values voting. I know you didn't mean it that way, but that's what most people mean when they say that.
I also think that the "issues" are important, but not in the way that most people think. I think you can do an "issues" vote much more closely aligned with the type of criteria you've proposed here, Licalzi: Not necessarily pinning down all the issues and agreeing, but having the same general mindset. I don't agree with Obama on a few of the issues, but he has the general progressive mindset that I approve of.

I cannot imagine voting for anyone who would not represent my desires 70-80% of the time. And there is typically a deal breaker issue or two - whether it be immigration, war, health care, abortion, etc. Whatever my deal breaker issues I would have to be confident when I voted that I was sending my voice to office on that issue.

Research suggests we tend toward semi-lexicographic preferencing -- that is, we have 1 or 2 hot button issues that drive our decision... mostly. One major problem is that the neuromarketers have shown that we don't always know our own hot buttons as well as we think, LOL.

There's also evidence to support Dr. LiCalzi that we pick a candidate, then rationalize the choice (e.g., pick & choose the issues you focus on).

He also alludes to research that a Governor has better odds for President than a Senator. Not relevant here, but... the taller candidate usually wins the White House & most Presidential candidates (and winners) are left-handed or ambidextrous [McCain & Obama are tall & ambidextrous; Hillary is...] Mid-range voice pitch is a lesser predictor.

However, the single best predictor is that for President & Governors, the candidate who scores higher on Selgman's measure of learned optimism [LO] almost always wins. {The LO measure is narrowly defined and is strongly associated with personal resiliency; on average, Libertarians score as most optimistic, followed by R's, then D's tilt pessimistic [Bill Clinton a big exception] then Greens who tend to score as very pessimistic - again by this LO measure [it is not your usual definition that focuses only on resilience to adversity.

p.s. predicting how vote can indeed be tough - in school we got abused by this evil data - in our large sample,
The poor leaned D
Blacks leaned heavily D
Catholics leaned D, but...
Poor black Catholics? Voted solidly R .... LOL

Darned humans... messy! LOL

This time in the voting booth it is very unique, never seen in America, so throw out your old school charts and thoughts, more people than ever are registered and ready to exercise there vote in mass, there decision to vote will be more of the same or a new future.

The conservative movement has destroyed our economic base, declared open war on the middle and working classes, thwarted the aspirations of the intellectual and professional elites, dismantled the basic processes and functions of democracy, failed to prepare us for the future, overseen the collapse of our economy, and misused police and military force so inconsistently that Americans are losing respect for government. (Is that what you call republican optimism)

The American middle class built on New Deal investments in education, housing, infrastructure, and health care, produced a very prolonged period of objective economic and social development. People were optimistic, generations of growing prosperity raised their expectations that their children would do even better.

Conservative policies have opened the wealth gap to almost depression levels, put workers at the mercy of their employers and deprived the working middle classes of education, home ownership, health care, capital,and their expectations of a better future for their kids.

You can only get away with blaming this on gays and Mexicans for so long before people get wise to the game. The primaries are making clear all Americans are getting wise.

In addition the irrational ineptitude in deploying government forces leads to public contempt for the power of the state, and leads the governed to withdraw their consent, eventually it raises people's determination to stand together to oppose state power.

Revolution becomes necessary when the ruling classes fail in their duty to lead

HA HA HA HA

We come from FRANCE!

A REPUBLICAN!

is a crime in foreignoregon.

I see no Democrat running for local offices, nor do I see any independent running there. Thus these Republicans already have the positions. Why on earth are they constantly wasting their dollars and sending out their ads, both large and multicolored to the public. If their willing to waste their own money then they will waste our money even more so.

In answer to your statement, "Additionally, to not campaign and just act like "this baby is mine," is a sign of arrogance...and we have that aplenty already." Sending out mass mailings after mass mailings is over doing it by some big bucks. It is arrogantly wasteful particularly when they know "This baby is mine!" Of course all need to keep their name "out there"! It is the NUMBER of mass mailings I'm objecting to.

Channel 6 spent over 20 seconds mentioning this blog entry and only two responses? Tell them to work harder.

I'll vote for you, K?

Update: Mom and Dad did but they aren't running unless you count off for a vacation soon.