I was listening to a podcast from Gary Vaynerchuk a few weeks ago when he made a point that he tends to trust “purple people” more. In this case, “purple” refers to people that aren’t 100% red or blue when it comes to politics. I totally agree.
I’ve said before that I gain the most wisdom from people that can see both sides of the aisle. If you are hardcore red or hardcore blue when it comes to politics, that’s a stance you are absolutely allowed to take. However, it means that I know your views are likely slanted and it will be more difficult to gain a fair understanding in many situations, and it can have some bad outcomes.
For example, in our last school board election, we had a hard-fighting mother (D) with children in the local schools going against (literally) a racist old white man (R) who falls asleep in meetings. He won solely due to the (R) next to his name and people that “had” to vote a straight ticket. It was shameful. More people being willing to be just a little bit purple would have made our county a better place to live.
We all have the stances we take on various issues, and sticking close to our desired political party makes a lot of sense. However, if you’re unwilling to ever let a bit of “purple” show up in your supported candidates, your view of the world might be a bit too narrow.
Being in the same school board district, I feel the pain on that one. Though I viewed it more as voter apathy than a desire to vote a party ticket. It’s easier to vote the incumbent than to do research on both candidates and make an informed decision. Either way, the result was disappointing.
That’s a great point. While I see party ticket in a few particular people in the area (and I may have given it too much weight), I agree that being an incumbent is worth a lot too.
I generally abstain from voting on any race on the ticket that I don’t have an informed view of, but I suspect I’m in the minority there.