<p>Because this was done with Republican and Democratic voters, I thought it'd be fun to do it on here. Please don't hold back your prejudices because this is anonymous, although I'm sure the results would be flawed because who wants to admit their flaws. I have changed some of the categories, but it's generally the same.
Would you vote for a candidate who shared you're views generally if he was:
-African American
-Hispanic-American
-Asian-American
-Caucasian-American
-Native American
-Mormon
-Protestant
-Catholic
-Atheist
-Hindu
-Muslim
-Deist
-Jew
-Buddhist.</p>
<p>race doesn’t matter, but religiously, i’m going with the Deist.</p>
<p>I’m a Democrat, and I’d vote for anyone in those groups as long as they shared my views, had a reasonable chance of winning (as in, they weren’t a fringe candidate), and I could expect that they would be the best choice in the election for getting [good] things done (that they’d keep their word and push forward those views).</p>
<p>I’d vote for any of these groups, as long as they shared my ideology.
What about an adulterer who shared your views? This man/woman had an affair, broke it off before entering politics, and it is public that he/she had an affair. Would it make a difference?</p>
<p>I would raise and eyebrow, because he is in a relationship and vowed to be exclusive to that one person. S/he lied to their partner, I can’t trust to put someone in office with that character. So maybe not, because it is a bit shady.</p>
<p>A Buddhist as president would be pretty neat.</p>
<p>Honestly, I don’t see race or religion as a qualification for office, with some exceptions. I would never, for example, vote for a Satanist, even if they claimed to have similar views. Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Sikh, etc. is fine, but I just couldn’t see myself trusting a person of such association. </p>
<p>You can tell a lot about a person by the ideologies and organizations they associate themselves with. Hence, merely being a member of a Satanic cult or KKK is enough to disqualify them in my mind.</p>
<p>As for skin color, that’s just plain ridiculous. We have absolutely no control over this aspect of ourselves, and the fact that so much attention is given to pigmentation is frankly disgusting. Not to turn this into an AA discussion, but whenever I have to fill out “race” on applications or tests, I fill out “other” and write “Homo sapiens sapiens.” Being a human makes me who I am, not my skin color.</p>
<p>I’m testing prejudices here, and I’m failing apparently. Of course it isn’t a qualification, but you have to remember barely 50 years ago, people were worried that JFK would take orders from the Pope.</p>
<p>I don’t care about any of the listed stuff, but I probably wouldn’t vote for someone who had an affair. Although if the alternative was someone with the opposite platforms… eh, depends on his/her opponent I guess, but I guess even that would be possible.</p>
<p>I would vote for someone who had an affair, although I would could it as a negative towards that person as I do view it as a breach of trust.</p>
<p>the hispanic person (im kind of biased but in my experience in life theyve seemed to be really nice for some reason, and not even being racist but hard-working too) lol</p>
<p>I refuse to vote for whitey.</p>
<p>I would go with a Buddhist</p>
<p>Is there any type of person who you’d automatically vote for even if he/she wasn’t ideologically similar.</p>
<p>No, ideology always comes first.</p>
<p>Agreed, ideology comes first. </p>
<p>I think the reason why you’re “failing” is because you’re on a forum with presumably intelligent young people, who tend to not be bigoted/prejudiced/racist.</p>
<p>Fine, let me change the question. Most Americans vote with their hearts, not their minds. It’s instinctive to them. Do you consider social or fiscal issues more important in a campaign?
In other words, does a candidate’s position on issues like the legalization of pot, immigration, and affirmative action factor in as much as the candidates position on entitlements and debt?</p>
<p>I’d vote for a poor person over a rich person, assuming a general match in character otherwise. All of our presidents have been rich before being elected, even the black one.</p>
<p>
Fiscal, which means I’m often for candidates who are against me on other issues. I generally go with the “Who will be best for the most amount of people” approach.</p>
<p>I care more about a Candidate’s opinions than his race or religion. Though, I think it would be cool if we had a president who was half Native-American and half Albino who also was trained as an assassin, who was practicing Hinduism, and was born in Oklahoma, but spent some time in his childhood in North Korea.</p>
<p>Whe it comes to me, social issues always come second.At the end of the day, Gay marriage doesnt affect my heterosexuality, pot legalization doesnt affect my sobreity, and school prayer doesnt affect commitment to Christianity. Fiscal and monetary policy, on the other hand, will probably affect my ability to find and/or keep my job, home, etc.</p>