Local Elections: Hospital Trustees

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 03, 2014 5:27 AM GMT
    Just in case there are a few people left here who don't already hate me...

    I've concluded most of my research to vote on Tuesday, but I'm at a complete lost regarding the county hospital trustees. I am not very well educated on the functions of the office , but the few candidates I could find online had discussed outreach and education as a secondary part of the job. I can find even less about the oversight and planning which I assume are the primary duties of the board.

    I would be tempted to just leave this box blank, but I know we have various members here involved in public health causes for obvious reasons, and a few more who work in the health sector, so I thought it may actually be a relevant question here. Is there a right way to research metro area hospital board ballots? Do those votes actually have real noticeable impacts on people active in a local health community?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 03, 2014 6:29 AM GMT
    I wimp out; if there's no party affiliation for the office then I don't vote for anyone.

    I don't know if all states do it but we also vote for judges, which I think is stupid, so I always vote for the incumbent judges. I do that because awhile ago a state supreme court justice was voted out because she was anti capital punishment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 03, 2014 3:35 PM GMT
    My concern would be two-fold: the current position they're attempting but also where that might springboard.

    So if I knew the parties of each and both candidates seemed equally capable, then I'd vote my party. If my party person didn't seem great but not terrible, I might still risk that. If my party person seemed incompetent and the other person didn't to my knowledge seem too terrible on social issues, then I might vote for that person even though not my party. If either were so pathetic, say both candidates were either incompetent to my eye or if either had a known record of, say, voting against my human rights, then I'd write in my own candidate, either a real one or in protest, or I'd leave that one blank for better informed others--or chance--to decide.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 03, 2014 11:47 PM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal saidI wimp out; if there's no party affiliation for the office then I don't vote for anyone.

    I don't know if all states do it but we also vote for judges, which I think is stupid, so I always vote for the incumbent judges. I do that because awhile ago a state supreme court justice was voted out because she was anti capital punishment.


    I basically went down the list on judgepedia.org to make sure there were no crazies; for better or worse, I took the lack of interesting entries as a good thing and plan to vote for retention across the board. icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 03, 2014 11:54 PM GMT
    theantijock saidMy concern would be two-fold: the current position they're attempting but also where that might springboard.

    So if I knew the parties of each and both candidates seemed equally capable, then I'd vote my party. If my party person didn't seem great but not terrible, I might still risk that. If my party person seemed incompetent and the other person didn't to my knowledge seem too terrible on social issues, then I might vote for that person even though not my party. If either were so pathetic, say both candidates were either incompetent to my eye or if either had a known record of, say, voting against my human rights, then I'd write in my own candidate, either a real one or in protest, or I'd leave that one blank for better informed others--or chance--to decide.


    For the candidates with party affiliations I basically reversed my usual formula, which is to vote Democrat local and third-party federal (I dare not risk Republican unanimity in 2016). In some ways this was tantamount to voting Republican in a number of state elections; the gaps were all too wide to counter anyway, and the Democrats' nominee for Sec. of Ag. here was appallingly bad (zero agricultural experience, and that was according to *her* website).

    I'm still at a loss for the hospital board, but I guess I'm still marginally better prepared than last time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 04, 2014 1:19 AM GMT
    I had a few about which I couldn't discern their party and I wasn't familiar with their record or capabilities. I think most anyone running for any office (with maybe the exception of a judge but I'm not even sure how I feel about that) ought to declare a party if they are affiliated.

    So I googled the hell out of them, looking for any article or mention and even though I'm not real into guilt by association, that can be telling, so I also looked into organization membership including churches etc. and then I'd check to see if those places where at least gay tolerating. My big issue is to not vote for someone who would vote against my human rights. I also checked their endorsements to see if there was anything ratty there.

    There was one who I wasn't familiar with but who had the endorsement of someone I consider to be completely smarmy. No way would I vote for that person.

    On some candidates there's just not much easily accessible. They might be new with no record. In one case I voted for someone who I wasn't familiar with other than that I didn't find anything terrible and they lived in my area so I thought it might benefit my neighborhood to have direct representation and maybe pull on projects.

    It's a lot better than it used to be though. For many years before the internet, I left most of the judges blank because I just had no idea.