NationStates Jolt Archive

The Six Types of Voters:

1. Ideological
No consideration other than I am a [fill in the blank] and I will always vote [fill in the blank]. They will turn black into white if they have to but everything their party does is golden.

2. Policy wonks
They will create big tables that compare the party platforms on an issue by issue basis and arrive at decision based on which party provides the best policy match with their own beliefs. (Often accountants, engineers, economics or assorted other self-described geeks)

3. Dinner party preference
They will form their opinion of which party to vote for based on the expressed opinions of influencers like friends, co-workers, priests etc.

4. Strategic voters
Will vote for the people most likely to defeat the people they hate the most (an odd but persistent tradition).

5. Candidate supporters
They vote primarily for an candidate with less weight going to policy or party affiliation.

6. Irrational rejection
Rejection of an alternative based on stereotypes.

I know we're all probably a mix of types, but pick the one that describes you best.

(Thanks to Odd Thoughts. http://www.oddthoughts.ca/

Canadians, go check out his blog.)

Anyone who's charismatic. Hitler would have my vote, dispite me being part Jewish, black & Catholic...

Oh, and I'm a "policy wonk" with a dash of "dinner party preference".

I like this part of the blog (parentheses and bolds mine):

The CBC reports Harper as saying (regarding same-sex marriage) :

“We were committed at the time of the convention and through the last debate to put a free vote to the next Parliament on this issue,” he said. “It will be a genuinely free vote when I am prime minister. I will not whip our cabinet. Cabinet can vote as they want.”

He said if the House votes against changing the law to allow same-sex marriages, the matter would be settled.

As other’s have pointed out, the CPC members have already had a free vote on the issue and they lost. What he really means is that he wishes to vote away peoples rights when he has more seats and a better chance of winning.

Oh, and I'm thingy, I voted erm... Policy Wonk. But I'm coming out of a long patch of being Strategic.

Combo of Strategic and Issue-Based.

Basicly however will help make me OVERLORD OF THE EARTH!

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!:D

Generally I go through the effort of ensuring that the people I choose to support are the least worst people for the Job, so I suppose I have something of a combination of Policy Wonk and a Strategic Voter.

Generally I go through the effort of ensuring that the people I choose to support are the least worst people for the Job, so I suppose I have something of a combination of Policy Wonk and a Strategic Voter.
Yes, but all your votes are n/a. Therefore, all your base are belong to us.

Probably a mix of 1 and 2.

Yes, but all your votes are n/a. Therefore, all your base are belong to us.
NS Z0MB13s being denied the vote is the most heinous violation of justice that I have heard in the last 28.6 seconds!
The MAN isn't going to keep me from excercising my rights!

Who ever will legalize weed. However that's not on the cards for any major candidate running in my area, so I spoil it.

NS Z0MB13s being denied the vote is the most heinous violation of justice that I have heard in the last 28.6 seconds!
The MAN isn't going to keep me from excercising my rights!
NS Z0MB13s are not to know about the Man. Besides, allowing NS Z0MB13s to vote would make them extremely difficult oppress. Also, if we don't oppress the Z0MB13s, the superior people may get upset when the genocide starts.

Policy wonk with a side of strategic voting and a dash of irrational rejection. :p

Policy wonk with a side of strategic voting and a dash of irrational rejection. :p
Ditto. I wonder though, isn't Strategic voting & Irrational Rejection the same? I mean, it's in the eye of the beholder innit?

Policy Wonk (or "apartisan;" one who makes up his own mind about issues and does not require the advice or cues of any particular party).

In the recent referendum vote in my state, I voted against the advice of my party on most of the issues.

Ditto. I wonder though, isn't Strategic voting & Irrational Rejection the same? I mean, it's in the eye of the beholder innit?
Depends on how many major parties your system has. Irrational rejection and Stategic voting may be the same in a two party system, but not necessarily in a multi-party system.

I vote fairly ideologically, but I don't decieve myself into thinking the party the guy I voted for is infallible. I'm more than happy to point out the flaws of both parties, even if the guy I voted for is a member.

I'm an ideological voter interspersed with support of a candidate and some strategy. Smart me, huh?

2. Policy wonks
They will create big tables that compare the party platforms on an issue by issue basis and arrive at decision based on which party provides the best policy match with their own beliefs. (Often accountants, engineers, economics or assorted other self-described geeks)
Well, yes, that one. Voted Conservative last German elections, and I'm really not the conservative kind usually...

i said irrational rejection, but i normally just vote to lose(third party or whoever is running against the undefeatable incumbant), except in local elections then i usually vote on personality.

"4. Strategic voters
Will vote for the people most likely to defeat the people they hate the most (an odd but persistent tradition)."

Unfortunately. Sigh. :(

Well, yes, that one. Voted Conservative last German elections, and I'm really not the conservative kind usually...
Tststststs... :p What kind of voter are you?

Tststststs... :p What kind of voter are you?
Well, since I only voted once, it's not like I have a profile. But I made up my mind what I would implement myself, and I looked at who approximated it most closely.
I also talked to my parents and grandparents, always read the newspapers and every party's program.

To my suprise (and initially disgust) I found myself agreeing with Merkel - and Schröder really had given it up. And even if he had won, he'd still be stuck with the Upper House blocking him.

I don't know what you would call that, but I approximated it with the "Policy Wonk".

Well, since I only voted once, it's not like I have a profile. But I made up my mind what I would implement myself, and I looked at who approximated it most closely.
I also talked to my parents and grandparents, always read the newspapers and every party's program.

To my suprise (and initially disgust) I found myself agreeing with Merkel - and Schröder really had given it up. And even if he had won, he'd still be stuck with the Upper House blocking him.

I don't know what you would call that, but I approximated it with the "Policy Wonk".
Hey, that's all fine and dandy. Don't let me tease you too much ;)
I actually read the different programs this time but couldn't get myself to vote any different from the last time(s). Anyway, not that I'm really happy about the turnout, but hey, according to what could've been I'm still quite happy and keeping my fingers crossed for Germany :D

I'll vote for the one who will kiss a black baby on TV without flinching.

would voting for a minor candidate that i don't particularly want to win, in a swing state, out of spite, even though i still find the other party to be a bunch of absolutely evil bastards who should never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power count as irrational rejection?

A mix of strategic and irrational. I have my own voting method.

- No matter the party affiliation always against the incumbant unless the incumbant is genuinely liked by me.

If voters did this method at a high rate:

1. It would eliminate career politicans and allow reformer a chance.
2. Force incumbants to do a better job be aware that voters will make way for one who will.
3. Undermine large political party power and go a long way to prevent them from consolidating more political power.

Also with this method, it doesn't matter if you work hard and can't keep up with the current or past issues, violations to citizens' civil rights, and any degradation to our Constitution the incumbant may or may have not have done, because his ass is out after one term anyway.

I would say idealogical, but I don't believe everything the party does & says is correct, nor would I defend them no matter what. I also changed my party preference a few years ago because I became disgusted with some of their policies.

Depends on how many major parties your system has. Irrational rejection and Stategic voting may be the same in a two party system, but not necessarily in a multi-party system.
True. And strictly speaking, I'm never an irrational hatred guy because of it. I just tend to forget I'm not the only non-USian on here.

*sigh* I so, so, so want to say that I'm a Policy Wonk, but... Well, politics are neck-and-neck between Democrats and Republicans right now. I REALLY, REALLY don't want the Republicans to win. So, I'm afraid I must bite the bullet and vote based on who's most likely to oust the conservatives.

At least, I will when I'm able to vote. Damn minimum voting age that's set too high! :mad:

In a place like NationStates, I guess it's not surprising we have so many "policy wonks". But I'm surprised that there aren't any "dinner party preferences", since I have met a number of them in real life. But then again, maybe me and my offline friends talk about politics more often than most people do.

Policy Wonk, but I accidentally voted ideologistsomething

Policy Wonk - unless the "best" candidate has absolutely no chance, then Strategic.

Policy wonk. As such I'm yet to vote for the winning victim.

You left "Disaffected" off the list, by the way.

A mixture of 1. and 2.

Do Americans really have any other choice other than "Strategic voter"?

I am a Policy wank.

Ideological. But differently. I look at the policies and average out the Ideology of the Candidate.
EG i would vote for a very right wing party candidate if his policies averaged as left wing

The Six Types of Voters:


I know we're all probably a mix of types, but pick the one that describes you best.

(Thanks to Odd Thoughts. http://www.oddthoughts.ca/

Canadians, go check out his blog.)
I guess you would call me a "policy wonk". I tend to vote for the party that best reflects my political beliefs. After looking at the whole picture, I will vote for the party that is best for my country, for my fellow citizens (on the whole) and for me and my family.

I guess you would call me a "policy wonk". I tend to vote for the party that best reflects my political beliefs. After looking at the whole picture, I will vote for the party that is best for my country, for my fellow citizens (on the whole) and for me and my family.
I would call that a policy wonk. :) It's what I do, even though you and I may disagree on who would do the better job of it.

I suppose I'm a strategic voter. I always oppose the conservative party regardless of who I have to vote for. Unless it was the BNP or Nazi party. Then I probly just wouldnt vote.

Here it is, Plator.

I switched browsers, and search worked for me.

policy wonk/strategic voter