One of the things that’s always seemed wrong to me is the option we’re given at the polls to vote a straight party ticket with a single check mark or pull of a lever, because this has always made it too easy for the results of the highest-profile races – like this year’s Presidential battle – to have a disproportionate influence over down-ballot races that really should be considered independently.
This is why so many Republican House and Senate candidates appear to be trying to distance themselves these days from Donald Trump, who’s sinking in most national polls. But that also works the other way -- in states where Trump remains strong, like Kentucky, many Democratic candidates are doing all they can to keep Hilary Clinton at arm’s length, so her local unpopularity won’t hurt their own chances.
This isn’t good. Should finding Trump unacceptable also automatically remove someone like Rand Paul from consideration for a second term? Conversely, if you just can’t stand to vote for Clinton, should it naturally follow that Paul’s opponent, Jim Gray, is also a no-go?
There are a lot of races on November’s ballot, with many good people on both sides. A blind straight-party vote – either way – ignores that fact, and denies too many deserving candidates the opportunity to be judged on their own merits.
Do you vote a straight ticket every year? Call and tell us why or why not.
I’m Bill Lamb and that’s my Point of View.