I also left all of the Democratic central committee votes blank. They should have a convention or something to elect their reps and not waste my time.

I did too and always do unless I personally know one of them which has happened a couple of times. But it makes sense to vote for them because IIRC if there’s a vacancy during someone’s term - if an official of that party dies or resigns - they end up deciding who gets to take their place.

I really don’t like the trend of electing judges and law enforcement. It turns them into politicians and warps their incentives. They need to fundraise and that means they owe favors. These should be appointed positions subject to civilian authority.

Same thing with town or county clerk. Make it an appointed position of a qualified professional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

WHY?
OMG did you never go to school

We live in a Democratic country we get to pick. Of course, that was until MAGA cult decided to be complete and utter idiots bowing to their fat orange idol.

Vote and do your homework this is literally easy not like they don't all have websites.

Please leave the US clearly you are not interested in living in a free country.

There's lots of positions we elect in some cases, but have appointed in others. We elect the Maryland attorney general, but not the federal attorney general. In Maryland the Secretary of Agriculture is appointed but I grew up in a state where that position was elected. We elect State's Attorneys, but in Connecticut they're appointed.

This is all a way of saying that "leave the country if you find believe in democracy" is a really bizarre response to having a different opinion than you do about precisely what positions should be elected.

Yeah, that person needs to chill. This has nothing to do about MAGA. Where I grew up, we had to vote for the Dog Catcher.

We don't vote for Dog Catcher down here - do you feel like you aren't living in a Democratic county/country because we don't vote for Dog Catcher?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

WHY?
OMG did you never go to school

We live in a Democratic country we get to pick. Of course, that was until MAGA cult decided to be complete and utter idiots bowing to their fat orange idol.

Vote and do your homework this is literally easy not like they don't all have websites.

Please leave the US clearly you are not interested in living in a free country.

There's lots of positions we elect in some cases, but have appointed in others. We elect the Maryland attorney general, but not the federal attorney general. In Maryland the Secretary of Agriculture is appointed but I grew up in a state where that position was elected. We elect State's Attorneys, but in Connecticut they're appointed.

This is all a way of saying that "leave the country if you find believe in democracy" is a really bizarre response to having a different opinion than you do about precisely what positions should be elected.

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

WHY?
OMG did you never go to school

We live in a Democratic country we get to pick. Of course, that was until MAGA cult decided to be complete and utter idiots bowing to their fat orange idol.

Vote and do your homework this is literally easy not like they don't all have websites.

Please leave the US clearly you are not interested in living in a free country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

But isn't it better to have, say, the governor, appoint these people since they have an idea who they are and what the job entails, while 90%+ of us have no idea? That happens in the Federal system. Like why am I voting for a judge in Maryland? The president appoints all federal judges.

DP. I disagree. My concern, rather, was that I had a difficult time finding specific information about some of the candidates and some of the positions. The eventual governor is likely to be someone whose positions may not align with mine on certain issues. I welcome the opportunity to have more of a voice — and would value this even more with ample information from relatively neutral sources.

My larger concern is that so few people vote, particularly for what might appear to be more minor roles, that the people who are elected might be chosen by a relatively tiny and unrepresentative group of the population as a whole.

One person, the governor, is even more unrepresentative of the group as a whole.

Exactly. Which is why I disagreed with the PP who wanted the governor to appoint people.

I agree with why we should vote for those positions but I also totally agree with you. For certain positions - County Clerk, Democratic Central Committee, Register of Wills, Sheriff and dare I say, judges - yes, I want to know your positions but more importantly, I just want to know if you are competent or not. Your policy position may line up 100% with mine but if you aren't competent, I don't want to vote for you.

I find it especially hard for judges - they are not allowed to campaign. I don't hear much about the judges. Are they competent on the bench? A few years ago, right before a primary or general election, there was a story that came out about one of the judges who was on the ballot. Turns out she had a DUI or something like that.

I forget if she was a sitting judge or not. I may have read her views and agreed with them, but once I saw that small article about her DUI (or whatever it was), that pretty much was more important to me than her policy positions so I did not vote for her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

But isn't it better to have, say, the governor, appoint these people since they have an idea who they are and what the job entails, while 90%+ of us have no idea? That happens in the Federal system. Like why am I voting for a judge in Maryland? The president appoints all federal judges.

DP. I disagree. My concern, rather, was that I had a difficult time finding specific information about some of the candidates and some of the positions. The eventual governor is likely to be someone whose positions may not align with mine on certain issues. I welcome the opportunity to have more of a voice — and would value this even more with ample information from relatively neutral sources.

My larger concern is that so few people vote, particularly for what might appear to be more minor roles, that the people who are elected might be chosen by a relatively tiny and unrepresentative group of the population as a whole.

One person, the governor, is even more unrepresentative of the group as a whole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

But isn't it better to have, say, the governor, appoint these people since they have an idea who they are and what the job entails, while 90%+ of us have no idea? That happens in the Federal system. Like why am I voting for a judge in Maryland? The president appoints all federal judges.

DP. I disagree. My concern, rather, was that I had a difficult time finding specific information about some of the candidates and some of the positions. The eventual governor is likely to be someone whose positions may not align with mine on certain issues. I welcome the opportunity to have more of a voice — and would value this even more with ample information from relatively neutral sources.

My larger concern is that so few people vote, particularly for what might appear to be more minor roles, that the people who are elected might be chosen by a relatively tiny and unrepresentative group of the population as a whole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

But isn't it better to have, say, the governor, appoint these people since they have an idea who they are and what the job entails, while 90%+ of us have no idea? That happens in the Federal system. Like why am I voting for a judge in Maryland? The president appoints all federal judges.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/justice/howdid/
https://today.law.harvard.edu/book-review/in-new-book-shugerman-explores-the-history-of-judicial-selection-in-the-u-s/

OP before you vote, download a sample ballot so you can research the down ballot races. I often rely on the Post editorial team’s endorsements or endorsements from local officials I know and trust. You can also just skip the races you don’t know enough about and still vote for the ones you do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

But isn't it better to have, say, the governor, appoint these people since they have an idea who they are and what the job entails, while 90%+ of us have no idea? That happens in the Federal system. Like why am I voting for a judge in Maryland? The president appoints all federal judges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

We’re actually hopefully moving away from appointments here when it’s still done because it does not represent the will of the people. The answer isn’t to remove voting but to get people more involved and knowledgeable about what is going in local politics. It is one of our main goals at Moderately MOCO

You think it’s important to vote on county court clerk? I like Alan Bowser, but c’mon.

I also left all of the Democratic central committee votes blank. They should have a convention or something to elect their reps and not waste my time.

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

We’re actually hopefully moving away from appointments here when it’s still done because it does not represent the will of the people. The answer isn’t to remove voting but to get people more involved and knowledgeable about what is going in local politics. It is one of our main goals at Moderately MOCO

Anonymous wrote:90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?

Because the people should have a say in their leadership, vs a patronage system?

90% of the candidates on the ballot today in Maryland I hadn't heard of and another 90% I don't know what the roles are. Why are these elected positions instead of appointed?