What's more important?

Like windsurfing said, I've never seen a candidate that I agree with on everything.

The way I look at it, I prioritize the issues that are important to me and support the candidate that I believe will act on the important issues first. Depending on how much of a blunderhead a candidate might be (like Bush2), the subject issue may vary. ie: To me the economy is usually the most important issue. But when a president sends our guys and my relatives off to die for someone else's cause as a personal vendetta (Iraq), my support will change.

Interesting. In theory, the economy is very important to me, but I don't feel like I have sufficient background to make a good judgment call on it. What do you usually base your evaluation of candidates on, in terms of the economy? (Or, is it the case that you do have a background in it?)

I would base my evaluation on fiscal responsibility policy and right now, neither major party seems to be acting responsibly. In theory, I favor the Republican party, but the last several years they have gone astray with spending so some of the Libertarian views are looking more palatable. One thing that will never work for me is 'spreading the wealth'.

I also recognize that most of the overspending originates with the Congress, and presidential power here, I believe, is too limited. Let the President exercise a line item veto. Numerous governors have it, the President should have it. Right now all he can do is lobby congress to go along with his policy.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, do you consider yourself a Democrat / Republican / Libertarian / Independent / something else? I wonder if conservatives or liberals have a stronger opinion on the economy... and if conservatives or liberals are more likely to judge that economic issues are intertwined with social justice issues?

Up until now I was independent. I registered Republican only to vote in the past presidential primary election. (In NJ you can't vote in a primary election unless you're registered to a party.) However, more and more, I'm agreeing with a lot of the Libertarian views. But until a third party gains enough strength to win a presidential election, I'll have to prioritize the issues more important to me at that time and vote accordingly.

I believe that both Dems and Reps share some of the same views on the economy, but they disagree on how to solve them. Lately both think that throwing money around will solve everything.

And I really haven't given much thought to economic issues being intertwined with social justice issues. I'd like to think they're not but I'm sure someone can make another case. I'd venture a guess that if we (the country) were really prosperous, the economic issue would solve a host of others.

I'm a liberal, by the way, although I used to be libertarian. I've always been big on civil rights, though, no matter which party I was batting for. You?

Foreign policy is #1 for me because that's where wars occur or get averted.

#2 is economy. I'm mostly a libertarian and would prefer the government to back off. I also believe a better and more globalized economy makes war less likely. And that a better economy fosters better civil rights and social justice and keeps the country more stable.

#2 is civil rights. I prefer to keep religion out of government and to extend full citizenry to all citizens.

#2 is character. Since no candidates ever satisfy me, I vote for ones who appear to have better character, even if I disagree with them on whatever.

(And if there were ever an Animal Rights candidate, I'd vote for them regardless of what else they stood for.)