This is ages ago, in some northern state a woman accosted a candidate and asked him if he was for or against abortion. He said he was pro-choice. She replied that she could not vote for him based on that. His response was something like, "If you are a single issue voter, then you are an idiot".

I suppose that it makes things simple for those voters who are too lazy to look at all the issues, or to consider that their particular issue is less important than the overall picture.

Question is, what issues are important enough for the overall good of this country that might make single issue voting the right thing to do?

Once we get enough responses, then perhaps a poll can be done.

I agre, single issue voting to some degree has made us a polarized as a nation with extremist politicians able to sneak through by playing to this or that single issue special interest group. I agree with the comment made by the candidate.......

Obviously, the person voting on a 'single issue' votes according to their premise of all-encompassing importance. Some matter, in that voter's view, overwhelms other issues by such a degree as to make them relatively inconsequential.

The phrase 'one issue voter' is a convenient and snappy cliche....When it is an issue of lower income tax rates or anti-discrimination policies, we use the term 'Republican' and 'Democrat'. When the issue at hand is 'abortion' or gun control' we use the term 'one issue voter'.

We have the right to vote for who we want for whatever reasons we want. I know women who voted for Gore because he was "cuter". I know men who would not vote for hillary clinton(if she decided to run) merely because she's a woman. It's their choice and I have no right to tell them they're an idiot just because I disagree with their voting tactics.

I personally don't believe there is any one issue that is more important than all others put together. So, if you do a poll, make sure to add "There is no one issue that is more important than all others put together" in it so I can participate too

I think the media and today's campaign style contributes to single issue voting...all you ever hear about IS single issues, usually the same handful every election. Healthcare, Abortion, Taxes, Education, Environment... There tends to be less platform politics nowadays, people have less of an idea of how all the single issue views fit together into a whole mindset. So , they pick what's most important to them and they vote based on that. A lot of people base their vote on party (esp. when it comes to races for other spots besides president). It's not how one should vote IMO but I suppose its better than randomly selecting.

At this point I would be tempted to vote for someone who pledged to devote his/her efforts to the economy. But I am not a single issue voter.

I suppose there is a degree of laziness involved with one issue voters, but I suspect that they don't want to look at the rest of the candidate's stances for fear that they won't like what they see. Just vote the way the Church tells you and everything is supposed to be all right.

I don't buy it. We have an obligation to use our heads. Candidates manipulate single-issue voters, and in fact they don't always keep their promises to single-issue voters once they're in office.

I have to agree that voting on a single issue is foolish.

My own process first involves the question on what is best for the country, state, county, or city - depending on the level of the election.

Then it goes into what's best for me. This is often at odds. For example, better education is good for the city and all the way up to the country, but that would cost more in taxes, so bad for me.

Well, I pay an extra sales tax now to upgrade city schools. I figure the few cents here and there doesn't hurt all that much and does a lot of good. Others disagree with my viewpoint, and so it goes. Seems that the majority agreed with me, though (or I with them, POV).

If we are talking national elections, then I think that it is impossible to make the voting decision on all the issues. It just gets too complex. So, what I do, and I think what most do, is to take a subset of issues. Also take a gander at party platforms.

Here's something to consider: Swing votes decide elections most of the time. You've got your party loyalists and your one-issue voters who can be counted on. It's always the soft party members and, more significantly, the independents who have to be swayed.

Anyway, three major issues coming up for next year: 1) job growth 2) Iraq exit 3) future of US. The order of importance will be changing rapidly.

Actually there are legitimate reasons to be a single issue voter. If I am a steel worker a parties stand on steel tariffs may be my defining issue. If I am a poor mother with a child with a serious illness a parties stand on healthcare may be the defining issue. If I am employed by a gun manufacturer a parties stand on gun restrictions may be a defining issue.

Voting on a candidate or not voting on a candidate because he is Pro-choice is ridiculous. When you vote for someone, you want to look at all of their opinions on issues. You may not like a guy because he is pro-choice but he has good ideas about foriegn or domestic policy.

It just makes no sense

If a person wants to vote for a candidate based upon a single issue, then that's their right. In my mind, the only way someone wastes a vote is by not voting at all.

How many people vote for the 'lesser of two evils'? Voting in favor of one candidate because another is terribly egregious is a one issue vote. Anyone here who thinks one issue voting is 'ignorant, lazy, or ridiculous' guilty of that one themselves?

But, wait a second. If I choose to vote for Bush because I dislike him less than Gore, why do I think Gore is worse? Because of the issues. Unless you're saying that "lesser of two evils" voting is because one smirks a lot and the other can't read.

Not true. No single issue encompasses exactly one matter...that's just a convenient cliche.

For example, an argument against abortion might be made on the grounds that it is a human rights violation, misuse of constitutional law, government sanctioned promotion of irresponsibility, a destructive influence to society in general. To that person, the future of our country rests on the repeal of Roe v Wade.

A person voting against Bush might vote against his foreign and domestic policies. To them, the future of our country rests on his ousting out of office, because they consider his foreign and domestic policies to be harmful to the country.....Obviously, there are also some whose lives are very directly influenced by the person in office. That individual would vote against the candidate who was the most likely to screw up their life.

Somehow, the first person is considered to be a lazy voter of the single issue, but the second is considered to be a well-rounded complete thinker.