In article >,
"l, not -l" > wrote:

> On 2-Nov-2010, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> > Can't
> > pick up the local paper for a few minutes and see who they are
> > recommending (or look at their web site if they don't want to pay for
> > the paper)?
>
> I'd rather someone not vote instead of base their vote on a newspaper's
> recommendation; that's as bad as blindly voting for whoever your union or
> church endorses. If a person can't invest an hour or two every couple of
> years to study the issues and candidate points-of-view (POV), they should go
> bowling or watch ESPN instead of voting. Certainly newspapers can be a
> source of information about the issues and candidates, as can candidate
> websites where positions on issues are posted and through non-partisan
> efforts such as those of the League of Women Voters.
>
> Learn, consider, decide; then, vote - blindly following another's
> recommendation is a fools way.

I agree with the "blind" part, but not the rest. Then again, maybe we
have newspapers here that I trust. I'm not happy with candidates'
positions here, they are all for motherhood and apple pie. I can't
argue with that, but since they are all for the same thing, I can't
choose based on that. Candidate mailers are worse. I'm supposed to
vote for them because they have a spouse and three cute kids? Because
they and their family have been here for a long time?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA