Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Your Take: Cross-party voting

Your Take: Cross-party voting

We asked for your take on cross-party voting – when do you vote party line? And when might you mix your vote? Our take is that cross-party voting is a signal that more and more Americans are putting country before party. And yet, some people believe loyalty to their political party is the best solution – and the patriotic one.

Here’s what you shared with us. Responses have been edited for length and clarity.


I voted Republican in every presidential election until 2016. My conscience wouldn’t let me vote for Donald Trump and I wasn’t crazy about Hillary Clinton, so I voted third party, putting country over party. During the Trump years, seeing the horrific decline of the Republican Party, I became an independent. I voted for Biden in 2020 and I am happy I did. - RH Shallenberg

I used to vote along party lines. It's how I was raised. However, I now always put country before party. Iit's important to look at the issues and individuals independent of party. - Mark Pommerville

Every time I vote. My country, my state, my city and county come first. I choose the best qualified candidate – Hillary Clinton, for example. The party usually has been irrelevant. Of course in 2020 and 2022, and perhaps the foreseeable future, it is dangerous to democracy (it's capitulation to authoritarianism) to allow any Republican to win. Their party is promoting Donald Trump's Big Lie, using their power to appoint anti-democracy judges, pushing laws that endanger the lives as well as the freedom of women with difficult reproductive situations. So in this case the party is terribly relevant. Supporting my country means rejecting the Republican Party. -Janet Basu

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

I take voting seriously. I have been voting for 50-plus years. I have rarely voted for an incumbent, mainly because I do not see them doing anything meaningful for the people (schmucks like me, the 99 percent). So, to answer your question, I have always put the “99 percent” over all politics. Unfortunately our “leaders” don’t. They put themselves above all. -Mike Dugdell

I've always put country over party. For me, party is only relevant because most local elections and all the way up to the level of senator or president are decided in the primaries in my state, as in far too many other parts of our country. I'm delighted that No Labels is producing a moderate alternative, as I feel far too many loyal Americans have been duped by parties and media to either join the extremists or leave the parties, and thus often waste their votes. -Mike O.

I am fundamentally an independent. I like to consider myself a Weld Republican. However, with the possible exception of Mitt Romney. I have voted for Democrats. My intention is to put the country first. I simply believe in fiscal responsibility. However, I believe in being socially responsible as well. -Craig Lindell

I have voted “the other side” many times in my life, but not once in this century. I did not feel vilified until then. The party wasn’t lockstep until then. I vote for, not against, but since that time I have not found myself for anything that party seemed to almost unanimously endorse. And as time goes by, that party is less for anything and totally against anything not proposed by them. I feel abandoned by half the politicians in the country. -Jeanene Louden

I'm sorry to say that since 2020 I will no longer consider any GOP candidate since the GOP no longer permits divergence within its ranks. This does not mean that I am satisfied with the Democrats either. They have also been drifting toward financial corruption for some time. At this point I think that ranke- choice voting has the best chance for salvaging any real democracy in the USA. -Bill Carr

I have always voted as an independent. That changed about 10 years ago when I noticed a need to vote in early primaries and retain Democratic leaders in our area. Then in 2016, I chose to vote for a third party because I didn't want Trump or Clinton to have my vote. I have had people tell me that my voting for a third party hurts but in the incident with Clinton, I believe the Electoral College screwed her. -Pamela Haddock

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is one of the founding documents of the United Nations. Sadly, the United States has shown hypocrisy in failing to practice what it has preached to the rest of the world for a significant part of the 20th century. So, yes, I have voted for third parties since I want real political parties instead of the sham elections and parties presented in the United States. It was interesting to watch how African leaders in nations with one-party systems would react to the U.S. criticism of their systems. But Julius Nyerere was correct when he said: “The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.” -Micheal Bannerman

I have voted on both sides of the aisle from state representative races down to local races. I choose based on character and on issues that candidates represent in alignment with my personal views. I have always voted Democratic for the House, Senate, and president (50 years). My most recent campaign contributions were to Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, and in both cases I put country over party (we don’t agree on many cultural issues, but both have good character and share respect for democracy and the law – a scarce and valuable combination that should be rewarded). - George Felt

Of course I've voted for "the other side" Because I had to register as something, I chose Republican and have seldom if ever voted straight-ticket. And I certainly won't this November. Only a person incapable of thinking for themselves would do that in my opinion. An a** is an a** and both the Democrats and Republicans have an abundance. -Lorine Nolte

Until about five years ago, I could be counted on to vote reliably for candidates from one party. It was easier to assume that the party was doing a good job vetting candidates than to do the work myself. As I became involved in Mormon Women for Ethical Government, I came to see that sort of straight party voting as problematic and have since left my party and taken on the identity of a principled voter. Like so many other MWEG members, it has been enormously freeing to stop letting a political party take away my power by making my choices for me. I am much better informed about the issues, I am very strategic about which candidates I vote for, and I regularly vote for candidates from both major parties. I can’t imagine going back to relying on partisan interests to pick my candidates for me. -Emma Petty Addams

Read More

Photo from the movie "Conclave"

"Conclave," Ralph Fiennes' new movie about a papal election, offers valuable insight into our own election.

Focus Features

Certainty is the enemy of unity and tolerance

Schmidt is a columnist and editorial board member with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Certitude in viewing the other side as malevolent might just break the country apart, but putting faith in one another and our institutions might be the glue that can keep us together.

Just days before Election Day, I chose to go see a movie in a theater as a way to break away from the horse race politics and hyperpolarized rhetoric. Little did I know the movie would provide me with valuable insight into the very thing I was trying to escape.

Keep ReadingShow less
Elephant and donkey playing tug-of-war over a cliff
John M Lund Photography Inc/Getty Images

Whatever happens Nov. 5, democracy will remain in deep trouble

Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College.

Sunday brought more bad news for and about American democracy. In the latest New York Times/Siena College poll, only 49 percent of respondents said American democracy does a good job representing ordinary people. Hardly a ringing endorsement of our form of government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less