Politicians don’t STOP listening when they’re voted in, they stop listening when there isn’t a reason to listen. The game isn’t over when election day is over. It isn’t even, “Okay, lets start looking at 2012″. Not at all. Mr(s). President elect has to keep listening until they leave office. That’s life and power in the political system.

• Is it a waste of a vote if you vote for a candidate who does not win?
• Is your vote wasted if the candidate disagrees with you?
• Is it a waste unless the candidate is effective once they are elected?

Getting the candidate by the purse strings – where they’ll listen – is how you have the chance to influence what issues they talk about. It forces them to deal with your positions and address your concerns. It seems to me that no matter how electable or effective a candidate proves to be – if you vote for someone who ignores you then you have wasted your vote.

“Do I waiste my vote if I give it to you?”

Early primaries allow voters in other states to see what substance there is to a candidate.

My money is sufficient, nor is it my desire to attract Mitt Romney, Barak Obama, John McCain, or John Edwards to come to Idaho… Sorry, it wouldn’t happen anyway.

We both agree very much about the importance of transparency. I also think you are right that getting out and casting a vote is not all we want from voters, but I think it is an important preliminary step for voters to take a few times before many of them will really feel like there is a reason to get more informed before they cast future votes.

Bill,

It almost sounded for a minute like you were in favor of living in a state where you could cast your vote later in the process. Most people fail to recognize that they can get involved and increase their political voice by voting with their wallet. Whether we like it or not, candidates will go to the places where people are willing to donate to their campaign. It won’t get the same attention as Iwa or New Hampshire, but it is a way that other states gan garner soe attention from the candidates early in the process.

The precursor primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, Florida, etc. Show tone. It also gives the rest of us a chance to see the candidates in a pinch. What do they do when their backed into a corner. I think it gives a chance to see a more accurate picture of their “inner ticker”.

What I struggle with is when a low deligate state decides to hold the primaries when they can no longer offer much of a voice. It just gives you a chance to ratify or disagree, but the ability to effect change is lost.

The question to all of us commited bloggers, is how do we not only engage people with the idea of voting, but with the idea of seriously studying the important issues that separate candidates.

You and I may disagree on political philosophy, but I do think we agree that transparency and increased involvement from our fellow citizenry is a good thing. I appreciate you making that case.

BTW, I noticed on my blog that I had misquoted the name of your blog as a link from my blog. I got that corrected.

Best regards David.

As for your voting status – let me offer a correction. If you are registered to vote, but not registered with a party you would be listed as “unaffiliated.” Unaffiliated voters can vote in either primary although the Republican party requires that unaffiliated voters who want to vote in the republican party primary must affiliate with the republican party – which can be done at the polling location (essentially you sign a statement that you want to affiliate with the Republican party). basically, if an unaffiliated voter wants to vote in the Republican primary and remain unaffiliated they have to sign the statement when they vote and then take the time to change their affiliation back to “unaffiliated.”

Am am unaffiliated and have not decided which primary to vote in yet, but I will be voting and I encourage you to vote as well. Even if you’re not registered yet you still have 12 days to get registered.