Local elections now seem to be almost designed to provide as little info about the candidate as possible. Sometimes it's even hard to tell what party they are in.
And the press does little to help, especially with judges, may as well throw a coin up in the air to figure out their past.
Local politics is less partisan. My dad's a diehard republican, (Fuck you, dad,) but he'd vote for democrats in his town because he knew them and thought they were good people. I watch politics like other people watch sports, but the more local it gets, the less I care. Its the national conversation which gets me all fired up. But your right about local politics affecting you more, unless the president manages to start world war three.
I know what you mean. My brother and my dad are what I refer to as FOX radicalized Republicans, they wear permanent ear plugs. :)
I would have no problem voting for one of the more moderate Republicans, if any still exist. But currently trending left to offset the heavy right wing emphasis that has entrenched itself over the past 25 to 30 years.
Easy on your Dad, I'm sure he has his reasons ;-P I like the sports analogy. . . I couldn't care less about local prep football, but can't wait until opening day in the NFL. How do we make people care more about the politicians who will actually have an impact on their schools/roads/etc?
Totally agreed on the role of the press. . . that's why I was surprised how bad the coverage provided by the Star Advertiser was. They essentially acted as a filter, since not having a bio on their website instantly disqualified them from my due diligence. There's gotta be a better way to get this info out there, an ignorant electorate is a dangerous electorate!