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

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

elementary school classroom
Urgent action is needed for our beloved public schools to renew civic life, writes Goodwin.
skynesher/Getty Images

Teach Leveraging in Middle and High School To Promote Democracy

It's all about leverage. You hear this from a lot of people. Thomas Friedman said it years ago in one of his Sunday New York Times columns on foreign policy. He was referring to international relations. In particular, he was talking about bargaining leverage, namely the kind of leverage that is needed to motivate an ally or an opponent to change their course of action, whether it concerns trade, military build-up, or political alignments.

People in business, especially sophisticated big business, talk about leverage all the time. Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad wrote a chapter in their famous book, Competing for the Future, that was all about leverage, although the concept of leverage they were talking about was resource leverage, not bargaining leverage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Seattle Votes on Democracy Vouchers Designed To Counteract Wealthy Donors

If approved, the Democracy Voucher program would bring in $4.5 million each year through a property tax.

Road Red Runner/Adobe Stock

Seattle Votes on Democracy Vouchers Designed To Counteract Wealthy Donors

A public funding mechanism for Seattle elections is up for renewal in next week's election.

The Democracy Voucher program was passed 10 years ago. It offers voters four $25 vouchers to use each election cycle for candidates who accept certain fundraising and spending limits. Supporters said it is a model for more inclusive democracy, touting higher turnout, increased participation from more small donors and a more diverse candidate field.

Spencer Olson, spokesperson for the group People Powered Elections Seattle, which supports Proposition 1, said the program helps level the playing field.

"It's really important that people's voices are heard and that candidates can run being supported by their constituents," Olson contended. "Versus just listening to those wealthiest donors, those special interests that have historically been the loudest voices at the table and really dominated what priorities rise to the top."

The voucher is supported by a property tax. Olson and other supporters hope to bring the model statewide. Critics said the program is not big enough to make a difference in elections and has not curbed outside spending. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. Tuesday.

Olson pointed out the vouchers have succeeded in encouraging more diverse participation in local elections.

"The intention of the program was to bring a public financing program to Seattle elections to help empower more candidates -- more diverse candidates, women, renters, people of color -- to have equal access to be able to run, and run competitive elections without having to rely on wealthy donors, special interests," Olson emphasized.

Olson noted because the money comes from a dedicated tax levy, unused vouchers roll over to the next election.

"The goal isn't to create an unlimited pot of money but to be able to provide resources for candidates to run with the community's support," Olson stressed. "But it's not a blank check at the same time."

Eric Tegethoff is a journalist covering the Northwest for Public News Service.

Keep ReadingShow less
Defining The Democracy Movement: Rahmin Sarabi
- YouTube

Defining The Democracy Movement: Rahmin Sarabi

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's interview series engages diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This initiative is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

The latest interview in this series features Rahmin Sarabi, founder and Director of the American Public Trust, an organization dedicated to promoting and implementing deliberative democracy practices, such as citizen assemblies.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why Recognizing the State of Palestine Does Not “Reward Hamas”
An Israeli airstrike hit Deir al-Balah in central Gaza on Jan. 1, 2024.
Majdi Fathi/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Why Recognizing the State of Palestine Does Not “Reward Hamas”

President Donald Trump finally acknowledged there is “real starvation” in Gaza—a reality that has generated momentum among holdout countries to recognize a State of Palestine, as 147 of 193 U.N. members have already done. Trump claims that this impermissibly “rewards Hamas.” Concerns about the optics of “rewarding” a militant group that is not the country’s government should not drive the decision to recognize Palestine as a state or the decision to maintain diplomatic relations with its government.

Countries that have already recognized the State of Palestine point to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and the fact that the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) forms a defined geographic area with a government and a population—the traditional criteria for statehood. Countries that have not recognized the State of Palestine point to the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) lack of effective control over parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and to the idea that recognition can be used as future diplomatic leverage. But waiting to recognize a state of Palestine until after there is a negotiated agreement between Israel and the PA is an outdated position that amounts to “kicking the can” down an interminable road.

Keep ReadingShow less