Does military experience affect who you vote for?

MAJ Laurie H. — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:36:17 -0400

Since 1900 we've had more Presidential Election losers with military experience than Presidents with a military background.

Does military experience have any affect on who you vote for in major elections? Do you think a military background benefits or hurts candidates?

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jul 30 at 2014 9:43 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:43:28 -0400

Not really since there are so few candidates out there with it. Just having military experience alone doesn't make me vote for an individual, especially if they have a bad track record, but it does make me give someone a second glance.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2014 9:47 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:47:47 -0400

I respect all service, but I've met as many people in the military as out who I totally disagree with. Take a look at the global warming thread for instance...

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2014 11:35 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:35:41 -0400

I like the graphic, I didn't know Gore had served, 2 years as a journalist for the great magical wizard of Wikipedia. Does military service mean you deserve my vote however? Not at all. Look around, do you really trust that one guy over there in the corner with running your county/state/country? That guy is pretty shady.....

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 30 at 2014 11:42 AM

LTC Paul Labrador — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:42:41 -0400

Understand that since the 90's, the guys coming into the age range who would be a viable president were from the Vietnam/post-Vietnam era where there was no draft, so you have a smaller % of vets out there compared to the general population is very small. Prior to that we had WW2 vets all over the place and that reflected in the candidate experience. So take that we have folks with no service in office as more a reflection of the current population than due to service leading to policy stances.

That being said, I will take their service into consideration. I prefer candidates who have a track record of executive leadership experience. But as others have stated, it is merely ONE thing I look at.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2014 11:50 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:50:12 -0400

While military experience is a plus, I do not base my vote on it. The person must have a good character with excellent ethics, values and standards as well as having good ideas on what to do. The person must also be able to stand by their record and be honest about it. Overall, everything is encompassed around respect.

Response by Maj Jeremy R. made Jul 30 at 2014 11:53 AM

Maj Jeremy R. — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:53:47 -0400

I think it matters more that members of Congress have a military background - they're the ones that pass the laws. By last count it was roughly 83 to 84 members had military experience...not enough in my opinion.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Jul 30 at 2014 11:57 AM

SSG Ed Mikus — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:57:41 -0400

I think military experience hurts candidates, mostly because of media portrayal, but i believe it helps when it comes to doing the job of a president.

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Sep 20 at 2014 12:12 PM

MAJ Ronnie Reams — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 12:12:46 -0400

Mondale was a CPL serving at Fort Know 1951-1953, not a PFC as chart indicates.

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Sep 20 at 2014 12:19 PM

MAJ Ronnie Reams — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 12:19:36 -0400

A vet always has the edge for me in supporting a candidate.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Sep 20 at 2014 1:16 PM

SSG Trevor S. — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 13:16:12 -0400

I would rather vote for a civilian that "gets it" than a vet with only ambition as an agenda. That being said, civilian or vet we need a President that appreciates the gravity of the world situation, knows the effect of what he/she will ask of the troops, and has the courage to ask it when needed.

Response by SSG Pete Fleming made Sep 20 at 2014 1:26 PM

SSG Pete Fleming — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 13:26:10 -0400

It is a minor consideration, yes. But I look at their past, career wise and what they claim to stand for. Does their past reflect their positions? Do the their views on issues support and/or compliment mine? Are they the better candidate and what America needs...? America first, political parties last...

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Sep 20 at 2014 3:53 PM

Capt Jeff S. — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 15:53:16 -0400

One small question about the Infographic. Is it accurate?

Should we count Ronald Reagan's acting experience playing military officers as equal to having served?

Perhaps Tom Cruise could answer that question, seeing as [by his own admission] his job as a Hollyweird actor is more difficult and stressful than the combat our troops experience in Afghanistan. Part of me wonders how many Hollweird actors have PTSD from the military roles they played.

----------------------------------------------

That said, I don't think military experience necessarily needs to be a prerequisite for becoming POTUS, although many of our better Presidents have had that background.

Ronald Reagan may be a little overrated (according to Gerald Ford, who is by and large underrated in terms of his legacy), yet Reagan did reasonably well, despite his lack of military service.

Jimmy Carter is proof that having military experience doesn't always make one a better President however, but as weak as he was as a leader, he appears to have been eclipsed by the present one.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 20 at 2014 4:23 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:23:31 -0400

Saying that we've had more election losers with military experience than we've had winners isn't entirely accurate because in a lot of those cases, both candidates had experience. The way that statement was worded makes it sound like the individual with no experience is chosen over the one with experience which, over the course of our nation's history, goes the other way.

We've had more Presidents with experience than without.

And yes, military makes a difference to me to a certain extent. Overall political views are the most important thing. I won't vote for someone with the experience if I don't agree with their views or ideas.

Response by SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS made Sep 20 at 2014 5:31 PM

SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:31:55 -0400

MAJ Robert Petrarca I agree. If a Presidential Candidate served I will give them a second look, but if the persons views, ethics, and stances do not agree with me, I move on. I like to think I evaluate any candidate based on this criteria so I make a critical choice which supports a desired outcome.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 20 at 2014 5:52 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:52:32 -0400

If it came down to two candidates who both seemed knowledgeable in public affairs, and who were both open and willing to listen to their cabinet members, I would chose the leader with the military experience over the one without it. Unfortunately, we don't get great close choices these days. It seems like we have to choose the lesser of two evils.

Response by SSG Steve Furman made Sep 20 at 2014 6:06 PM

SSG Steve Furman — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:06:01 -0400

OBAMA gave Billions to the Muslin Brotherhood (They fund ISIS/ISIL) Obama told the enemy out withdraw time line (People die for that kind of intel.) Obama has created an or emboldened this Islamic state with arms and funds the like of which they have not seen since 711AD when they marched across Europe and held it for 700 years. Obama is not insane, he is a devout Marxist that promised "to take America down a peg" he promised to "Fundamentally change America" (unsaid was "to a Marxist state") Obama said we are not a Christian nation and he is fighting to make is so Christians can not freely be Christians. He is not crazy he is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. Read his books read Saul Alinsky one of Obama's heroes, Obama will not get impeached if we get the Senate he will get arrested for material support of terrorism and God willing we can get TREY GOWDY to prosecute. I will tolerate the intolerant Left "NO MORE" I will sit and let them tell me Islam is a religion of peace "NO MORE!" I let them trample my rights "NO MORE!" I experience no support in places like Somalia, and Iraq under Democrats and this POTUS is actively funding the enemy so yes I vot Tea Party GOP I am done playing the lets be liked and be independent game that just seem to get us (the guys in the field) killed.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Sep 20 at 2014 6:19 PM

CMSgt James Nolan — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:19:55 -0400

MAJ Laurie H. Ma'am, If I have the choice of voting for someone with and someone without-and all things are equal, Military experience gets vote every time (but you don't always know about it). I tend to vote very conservatively (and the military service becomes a bonus point).

I am quite opinionated, and am holding onto many of those opinions until I hang up my spurs and regain total free speech. That being said, I would love to know how many politicians (US, not just State) have served.

Part of the problem with politicians is that many never were in touch with "regular" folk. For example, if you drove to High School in a current year luxury car (Benz, BMW, Jag etc), you probably have no idea what it is like to have to make tough financial decisions, like 90% of the rest of the country does. Therefore, you have no idea how tough life can be. Case in point: Hillary Clinton, complaining about being broke, and having a hard time paying for multiple, multi-million dollar residences, whole making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year at speaking engagements-SERIOUSLY?

Response by SPC Richard White made Sep 20 at 2014 6:43 PM

SPC Richard White — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:43:28 -0400

Seeing what has occurred in recent events I would say I would vote for someone that has military service.All the cutbacks are really hurting the USA.Unfortunately I don't think the general populace wants a President with military experience.There are to many PC people out there.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 20 at 2014 8:21 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 20:21:08 -0400

Military service is not a significant factor in my opinion for determining a president. For me it comes down to ideals, how their plans mirror what I want for my family, moral standards, etc. A candidate's military service is irrelevant to me because more often than not, the actual level of service completed would have very little impact on the office of the presidency. Unless you are referring to a candidate who has / had strategic level leadership experience, then again that doesn't qualify them as becoming the Commander in Chief. It may help for a very small amount of issues but for the most part we have the JCS and our service chiefs for a reason.

Response by PO3 John Jeter made Sep 21 at 2014 2:15 AM

PO3 John Jeter — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 02:15:03 -0400

Service in the armed forces is a demonstration of commitment to something larger than one's own self. I don't consider it to be an overriding factor, but it is important. Personally I have always liked the idea of requiring some type of public service to gain your franchise to vote or hold elected office. I know there's flaws in the concept, but I still like it better than saying you're qualified to help chart the course of your country's future simply because you're 18 years old.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Sep 21 at 2014 8:10 AM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 08:10:15 -0400

A second look maybe.

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Sep 21 at 2014 1:28 PM

PO2 Rocky Kleeger — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:28:39 -0400

I genuinely feel that in order to be the CoC, you should have military service. That being said, I vote for whomever I feel can do the best job

Response by SPC(P) Angel Christopher made Sep 21 at 2014 7:38 PM

SPC(P) Angel Christopher — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 19:38:46 -0400

personally no. But statistics and studies show that yes it does.

Response by SSG Jacob Wiley made Sep 22 at 2014 7:56 AM

SSG Jacob Wiley — Mon, 22 Sep 2014 07:56:16 -0400

It should for everyone.

Serve in the military under a president who loves this country, respects the men and women he commands, and shows genuine concern and compassion for them. Then serve under a president who can't lower a cell phone to return a salute and has a complete disdain for all of us.

People need to look past democrat/republican, white/black, male/female and realize they are voting for their next Commander in Chief. Do you want a person who just wants power, luxury vacations and free rent for a while? Or someone who truly gives a damn?

Response by SSG Adrian Ducker made Sep 22 at 2014 7:05 PM

SSG Adrian Ducker — Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:05:17 -0400

While being a veteran may bring some brownie points, I would not want it to be the deciding factor in whether or not I would vote for them. For one thing, military “experience” could easily be a situation where somebody like General Eisenhower ran for president after a long decorated career but it could also be some guy who served as a cook for two years in the 80s, got out as a PFC, and is running for president 30 years later.

Besides, if we want to use whether or not they served as a reason to why they should be the Commander in Chief then should we also require the president to be a teacher due to the Department of Education, a farmer because of the Department of Agriculture, or a doctor because of the Health Department? The president has a cabinet heading those departments I mentioned and he has the SECDEF and the JCS to advise him with DOD.

Response by SSG Tim Everett made Oct 28 at 2014 9:58 AM

SSG Tim Everett — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:58:31 -0400

Military service is not a great indicator of ability to lead a nation. President George W. Bush had military service, and unless you're a party-liner I think you can probably find more than a few bones to pick with a number of decisions his administration made. Personally I feel that he ignored his military leaders and therefore screwed up both Afghanistan and Iraq. President Clinton was a draft-dodger, and despite not having any experience in a uniform I feel that he managed to do a great job with his foreign policy, to include peace in the Balkans and an aggressive pursuit of Bin Laden with intent to kill him.

Back in the political ramp-up to the 2000 elections, I was an ardent supporter of John Wayne McCain. Here was a MF'ing Marine, Vietnam vet, former POW. This guy was like a childhood hero. I felt let down when he quit. I felt let down when he continued to flip-flop on running. I stopped supporting him for future elections, and when he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, that basically sealed the deal for all eternity.

Now if General Mattis runs for office, sign me up. Double knife-hands during debates? Yes please.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 28 at 2014 12:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:04:18 -0400

I don't believe those Presidential Election losers were hurt by thier military background, they lost for other reasons. A military background is beneficial, however I don't see it as necessary... I'm not going to vote for someone if I don't like thier politics, even if I like thier service to this country.

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Oct 28 at 2014 1:08 PM

SPC James Mcneil — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:08:20 -0400

Anything we go through affects our outlook, whether good or bad. So military experience has an effect on us and on the way we vote. JMHO.

Response by SFC James Barnes made Oct 28 at 2014 4:09 PM

SFC James Barnes — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:09:53 -0400

Military service doesn't automatically get my vote. A proven track record of doing what is right and what's in the best interest of this country does. Lately though it seems like it is voting for the less of two evils.

Response by SGT Michael Glenn made Oct 28 at 2014 7:44 PM

SGT Michael Glenn — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 19:44:47 -0400

I will respond with this: I really dont think it matters who we vote for anymore because in the end its all rigged and who ever has the most money will win.g bush did not win that election and paid to have the recount in Florida sway to his favor. obama won because of all the dirty money from muslims and other ethnical groups he gathered, its no longer for the people by the people, its all about the rich corrupt and shameless.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Oct 28 at 2014 9:14 PM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:14:04 -0400

I think it is a plus but not necessary. What I would say that a president should NEVER have been a lawyer. He should be a successful business man and not a career politician. He should also be lawfully vetted by both sides.

Response by CW5 Sam R. Baker made Oct 30 at 2014 12:27 PM

CW5 Sam R. Baker — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:27:40 -0400

Voted today as a matter of fact!

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Oct 30 at 2014 12:55 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:55:23 -0400

Honestly, yeah it does. In addition to being able to serve in the civilian capacity of POTUS, the President is also the CinC. As such, I prefer that the person elected to such a position have command-level military experience.

Pickings have been slim lately, but maybe someday....

Response by SSG John Bacon made Oct 30 at 2014 1:23 PM

SSG John Bacon — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 13:23:10 -0400

Why is it that it's only Former Officers that run for President or high offices? How about getting a retired CSM as President. That would really change the ball game.

Response by MAJ Dallas D. made Oct 30 at 2014 1:33 PM

MAJ Dallas D. — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 13:33:39 -0400

All things being equal I would choose the Veteran over the non-veteran.

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Oct 30 at 2014 2:53 PM

SFC Ralph E Kelley — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:53:41 -0400

Certainly - I don't want the job ;D

Response by SGT Frank Leonardo made Oct 30 at 2014 3:01 PM

SGT Frank Leonardo — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:01:28 -0400

It does have some effect I would rather vote for someone that has military experience then someone that has none

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Oct 30 at 2014 3:22 PM

SFC Ralph E Kelley — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:22:42 -0400

Seriously this time.
One of the 'lame duck' Presidents, Jimmy Carter actually was the major factor during his Presidency that channeled research money into the development of the Bradley, M1 tanks, MLRS, and Stinger AA missile. He also did the same for the Navy, Air Force, Marine and Coast Guard.
To the Media at the time he was just a 'Peanut Farmer'. He did understand business and the reason why he focused the nation's budget into research is he knew that with the country just recovering from Vietnam he could not get support for maintaining the large military forces we had at that time.
Since he had to reduce the sizes of the military forces he decided to get a bigger bang for the buck, improve morale of the servicemen and train the services hard for the next (not the last) war. He directed the Chiefs of Staff to stop the turf wars, work together and develop a real "AIR, LAND & SEA" OPLAN instead of canned scenarios. He directed that the NTC be expanded and that Brigades be required to rotate through there. He personally ordered the first commander of the NTC to "Kick the BlueFor back to the California State Line". He order the expansion of SF and the assets that they needed supported. He began downsizing the services by forcing out 1/2 of the then (a 8-to-1 ratio of staff to fighters) bloated Officers and Senior NCO Corps. he also ordered the leadership to 'solve the problems of race relations, drug addiction and maintenance/supply shortfalls which plagued the military.
I was there so I know.
So not having military experience is not an issue for me on my vote.
Bringing real leadership to the table is of mucho importance
Having a big brass set helps a lot too.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2014 4:22 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:22:17 -0400

Having a military background is definitely a plus for a candidate but where they stand and what their views are is what will ultimately make my mind up. If a former military member were running and he supported big government and strict gun control and other liberal agendas then he definitely would not get my vote, regardless of military service.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2014 4:33 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:33:05 -0400

No. Military service doesn't make you a better Presidential candidate in and of itself. Jimmy Carter was a Navy LT (O-3). I've known military leaders I wouldn't trust with a sandwich much less a nuclear arsenal. Best man for the job gets my vote.

Response by 1SG Pete Marcell made Oct 30 at 2014 6:12 PM

1SG Pete Marcell — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 18:12:08 -0400

Nope, I vote for the best candidate for the position; right, left or middle.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2014 6:24 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 18:24:49 -0400

Yes. Why? Because I want to see MY interests secured, see my buddies lives better, and know my family will be taken care of. These last 8 years I've seen more, and more of our shit stripped away; losing base theaters, not having parts to fix planes due to sequester, having to now pay for dental for my wife/child, hearing more and more about them possibly squashing retirement...

So yes, it does effect my voting. Because we, as servicemembers, give a whole hell of a lot to our country for what we get. And people seem to be more than willing to take what we have for the sake of stupid projects that don't further, nor protect our country.

Response by SPC Tony Bucaro made Oct 30 at 2014 8:30 PM

SPC Tony Bucaro — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:30:51 -0400

I would vote for the Veteran over someone who has had no military background.

Response by SGT Robert Hawks made Oct 31 at 2014 12:04 AM

SGT Robert Hawks — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:04:24 -0400

Yes, I will normally support a candidate with military experience. I feel they can relate to military and veteran issues better than someone who has never served.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Oct 31 at 2014 1:22 AM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:22:09 -0400

It appears from the chart, military service has nothing to do with how good a president you are or how patriotic you are.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 4:47 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 04:47:26 -0400

I wish I could automatically vote for someone with military experience over someone without. Unfortunately, we all know that there are some individuals in uniform that are not trustworthy, just like in civilian life. Also, there are both conservative and liberal service members (granted, less liberal than conservative usually) who go on to politics. So the answer is, it depends. I have to look at the overall picture, and service may play only a small part in the decision.

Response by SFC Scott Crouch made Oct 31 at 2014 8:16 AM

SFC Scott Crouch — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:16:56 -0400

When you say "major" election, I ASSume you are talking about the Presidential election. Anyways, for me, if it is a Presidential election, then I am voting for the candidate that has military experience, with some exception. It is quite simple, if you have never experienced life in the military, then how are you supposed to be looked upon as the Commander-in-chief?

However, the exception is based on the person running and what they stand for.

Response by MSG Floyd Williams made Oct 31 at 2014 8:56 AM

MSG Floyd Williams — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:56:24 -0400

I think being in the military during voting time give you more insight who is supportive to the U.S. Armed Forces and the nation, being in the know on current events help you in the process to make a sound decision on who is good and who is not so good.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 9:02 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:02:07 -0400

Absolutely. A military mind set will not allow you to see it any other way.
Once you are a SM, regardless of the branch that you are in, you respect and
acknowledge the sacrifice and dedication of military service. I always
check the candidate's background to see if they have any type of military
experience. Service may not promise good leadership, but for me it's a good
start.

Response by SN Brian Riter made Oct 31 at 2014 9:34 AM

SN Brian Riter — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:34:36 -0400

yes because i can't really trust anyone of these Washington a-holes at all i rather have a president that has served like jfk or Reagan

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Oct 31 at 2014 9:50 AM

1SG Michael Blount — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:50:03 -0400

IMHO, somebody who served has a much better appreciation of human life and when it's worthwhile sending American forces. Someone without that background has absolutely no clue. I trust the former before I'll trust the latter with my life or those of my Soldiers. Accordingly, one guy gets my vote; the other doesn't.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 10:02 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:02:40 -0400

To me it all depends upon what they did while in the military. If they were simply a Specialist (no offense to Specialists) then it really doesn't sway me one way or another. If on the other hand they were in a leadership position and made some sort of positive impact than yes.

It would be the same if I was looking at someone's civilian career. Obviously a Steve Jobs running a successful corporation is preferable to Bubba Joe working the fry station at Mickie Dee's.

I believe we also look for people that have the same mindset and backgrounds that we can relate and share experiences with.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 10:29 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:29:55 -0400

Just FYI; President Gerald Ford, the 38th President of the United States, served in the United States Navy durring WWII. President Ford received his commission as an Ensign on April 13, 1942 and went on to serve the Navy in several assignments on shore and at sea. For his naval service, Gerald Ford earned the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with nine engagement stars for operations in the Gilbert Islands, Bismarck Archipelago, Marshall Islands, Asiatic and Pacific carrier raids, Hollandia, Marianas, Western Carolines, Western New Guinea, and the Leyte Operation. He also received the Philippine Liberation Medal with two bronze stars for Leyte and Mindoro, as well as the American Campaign and World War II Victory Medals. On June 28, 1946 President Ford was released from the Navy at the rank of Lieutenant Commander.

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Oct 31 at 2014 11:09 AM

SGT Suraj Dave — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:09:23 -0400

I don't vote, though I respect why people vote. The whole electoral college concept of our Constitutional Republic (or "Representative Democracy" depending on who you are talking to) really makes me think voting is a waste of time... but that's just me.

As for the other elections, where they actually count votes, I tend to not participate. I have not really stayed anywhere long enough to get into City/State politic's. Once i get to a state I plan to live at and call home, I will probably get into those.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 11:39 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:39:04 -0400

The men in suits always have and always will give the higher orders to the men in combat boots, but for me the man who has laced a pair is far more trustworthy. Few things are as sobering or as honorable as being responsible for the lives of other peoples loved ones in combat. Unless you have bled with my boys, you should NOT have the authority to send them.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 12:01 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:01:09 -0400

Military service is a factor in my decision making process, but the nature of the service and the CHARACTER of the candidate overall are more important to me. That said, I do think that honorable military service is an excellent qualifier, but it is not the end all be all factor in my decision for who gets my vote.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 12:53 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:53:52 -0400

Reposting a TED talk that is somewhat relevant to the discussion of military service & congressional representatives.

Starting at about 9:00, is an approximate statistic regarding how many of the 535 US legislators have children in military service...10.

Not your daddy's military | David Kennedy | TEDxStanford

David M. Kennedy is professor emeritus of history at Stanford, where he has taught for more than 40 years. Graduating seniors have four times elected him Cla...

Response by SSG Selwyn Bodley made Oct 31 at 2014 1:43 PM

SSG Selwyn Bodley — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 13:43:52 -0400

It's no guarantee but it certainly affects my vote

Response by SFC W Michael made Oct 31 at 2014 3:03 PM

SFC W Michael — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:03:31 -0400

I pay no more mind to a candidates military service than I do to thier religion or race. Just being a veteran does not make you any more qualified to be POTUS than not being. I would have to see the whole candidate. McCaine is a veteran, and he has many views I share, but I would not vote for him to be the President because he is too reactionary. We have a local politician who makes sure everyone knows he is a decorated officer. The problem is, he has no grasp of the economic and social problems the citizens in Pennsylvania are struggling with. For that reason, he would not get my vote.

Response by SGT Patrick McCullough made Oct 31 at 2014 4:39 PM

SGT Patrick McCullough — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:39:32 -0400

While I do believe it helps, it cannot be the determining factor in public perception. Public perception and popularity as well as financial backing win elections, not meritocracy.

Response by SPC Darrin Tinsley made Nov 1 at 2014 4:52 PM

SPC Darrin Tinsley — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 16:52:32 -0400

It not only affects my vote, I personally believe that service should be required to even run for office.

Response by SSgt Gregory Gardner made Nov 1 at 2014 5:53 PM

SSgt Gregory Gardner — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 17:53:38 -0400

I can only hope and pray that the next Commander in Chief will listen to his military advisers and maybe even have a military background. We've had too much disdain for the military under this administration.

Response by PO1 Timothy Miller made Nov 1 at 2014 7:06 PM

PO1 Timothy Miller — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 19:06:27 -0400

I believe that any experience you have in life affects your voting. The military definitely influences peoples' opinions on a variety of issues which in turn affects the decisions they make including voting. The military as a whole gives its members a broader view of the world in general. Without this experience voters are likely to follow patterns established by their parents, grandparents and others who they interact with on a daily basis. I hope the cartoon I have included reinforces this stance.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2014 12:34 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 00:34:30 -0400

President Eisenhower had a great military background and was a successful and one of our greatest Presidents. That he had the wisdom to run the country in balancing his military knowledge and his political abilities. Would a presidential candidate with the same military background be able to do the same thing today?
President Eisenhower was a great and persuasive diplomat though militarily strong-minded.
Today, the fear of a totalitarian government ran by soldier numbs many of compatriots. But there can still be another Dwight Eisenhower out here or even better.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2014 12:37 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 00:37:07 -0400

I would say it helps more than it hurts, military experience would give you a better idea of how the military works, and a better understanding of military strategy, potentially making for a better commander in chief. But I would never make it a sole deciding factor. That would just be dumb.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2014 12:43 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 00:43:49 -0400

No, as a soldier I do my best to maintain a balance between my military life and the life outside. Even though it is very tempting for a Soldier to be narrow-minded given the current news.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2014 12:54 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 00:54:24 -0400

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Nov 2 at 2014 9:48 AM

LCpl Steve Wininger — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 09:48:46 -0500

I am not as concerned about a candidates experience in the military as I am their record in supporting the military. I think a military background gives a candidate more insight as to what it is like in the military and believe their decisions to send troops into combat are carefully thought out.

Too many politicians, military experience or not, tend to make choices about the military based on their constituents instead of what is right. I believe this is why the military is being gutted. I am a strong believer in a strong military is a strong defense.

Too many politicians think the military is a pawn to get votes. Show me a politician, military experience or not, that believes our military is essential and shouldn't be used as a political pawn, and i will vote for that person.

Response by PO1 James Maynard made Nov 2 at 2014 10:30 AM

PO1 James Maynard — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:30:17 -0500

I think that the military background does benefit the candidates. It would help them with being the Commander in Chief cause they have seen first hand what others have done before, and help them make it better for the military. They would also have more experience with public affairs at times also, with the diversity of the military.

Response by SCPO Albert Lee Smith made Nov 2 at 2014 11:21 AM

SCPO Albert Lee Smith — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:21:46 -0500

If all things were equal, and military service was the only differentiator, then I would lean towards the candidate who had similar life expierences as me. This is, of course, in a perfect world.

In reality, I let a candidate's military service status weigh in on my decision more than it probably should ;-)

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2014 12:15 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:15:07 -0500

Yes I would take military service into consideration when looking at the candidates running. But I am more worried about their agenda, ideas and beliefs. I do not sit in the middle of many issues so I would me hard pressed to vote democrat in any election. I do not believe in the idea of the lessor of two evils. I have a set of beliefs, ideas and direction that guide me so why would I vote against my ideology just because of military service. Would I like to see military service on the resume, yes I would. But with the small percentage that serve I know it will not always be there.

Response by Cpl Christopher Allen-Shinn made Nov 2 at 2014 5:55 PM

Cpl Christopher Allen-Shinn — Sun, 02 Nov 2014 17:55:30 -0500

I would take it into consideration, but I'm more interested in the candidate's platform and party affiliation. I do think that military service is valuable, especially when the elected person has influence over foreign policy, veterans' affairs, or defense policy. However, I would say that it is one of several factors that I consider, so it probably wouldn't be the deciding factor for me unless all of the others are an effective draw in my assessment.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2014 4:06 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 16:06:08 -0500

Mam, I vote for candidates that share similar beliefs and want the same type of things done to restore this country to it's former Glory. Sometimes a candidate having military experience does help, but not always.

Response by Sgt Jarrod Tallman made Nov 4 at 2014 7:25 AM

Sgt Jarrod Tallman — Tue, 04 Nov 2014 07:25:42 -0500

Yes and No. I would like to see more former military veterans in leadership roles in the government. But at the sametime I want the most conservative, constitutional candidate.

Response by MSG Greg Kelly made Nov 6 at 2014 5:09 AM

MSG Greg Kelly — Thu, 06 Nov 2014 05:09:55 -0500

I want to say no it does not, but I joined at 17 in fact 3 days after it took that long to get father to sign. I already had it in my head about how things should be done. Maybe because I was the youngest of 9. I learn early you worked and did your chores and helped the family you were rewarded. And you were expected to get a job and work to help support the family. I think I learned conservatism at home but I learned politics due to the military I was told by my leaders who then also believed they were mentors and taught soldier skills and life skills so I would say my conservatism training was completed and sealed in the military.

Response by CW4 Ray Montano made Nov 7 at 2014 6:21 PM

CW4 Ray Montano — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:21:39 -0500

Would you believe I never voted once, while in the military? My first experience voting was right after I retired.

Response by SPC Thomas Lema made Nov 22 at 2014 7:11 PM

SPC Thomas Lema — Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:11:38 -0500

Myself I would prefer a commander and chief who has served over one who has never served. That is unless i disagree with how they would run the country'

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2014 5:49 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:49:08 -0500

It would appear that military background would make a presidential candidate more electable, but it hasn't because a leading our nation's military has not been the only thing expected of the U.S. President. We will see if in 2016 if it will play a bigger role.

Response by SPC Stewart Smith made Jan 29 at 2015 8:17 PM

SPC Stewart Smith — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:17:25 -0500

I don't think a man or woman should be able to command others to go to war if they have no experience in it.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 30 at 2015 2:28 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:28:50 -0500

Absolutely, a candidate's military experience will influence my vote. Then again, their civilian experience will influence it. Moreover, their political experience will influence it. I choose a candidate for political office to receive my vote in the same manner that I would use to select a candidate for a job.

If someone has no executive experience whatsoever, why would you vote for them to occupy the White House? (No, seriously, why did all of you who voted for President Obama?)

A military officer is an executive which is why I would consider an officer's experience as a qualification for a civilian or political executive role (Governor or President). Unless, of course, their experience included losing battles, wasting resources, sending warriors needlessly to their deaths.

The sad truth is that those with civilian executive experience rarely become candidates for elected office. Why would they? CEOs impact their communities much as the President, but with far greater compensation and far fewer headaches and heartaches.

(Why did Romney run?)

Another sad truth is that few civilians (no prior military experience) who run for elected office have leadership experience. Many have managed but few have led. Very few who get elected to Congress have military leadership experience. This is why we end up with a Congress that rarely leads. Wouldn't it be nice if they met and discussed the nation's problems, crafted solutions, and then returned to their communities to lead their constituencies in taking action to solve problems. Instead, they sit in Washington throwing money at problems with little discernible improvement.

Response by SSgt Jacob Lenfestey made Jan 30 at 2015 4:36 PM

SSgt Jacob Lenfestey — Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:36:56 -0500

Having military experience is definitely a plus in my mind and was even before I had joined. With that being said, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, if I had a choice between a senator who had political background for several years versus a separated captain with just a BA in some political field it would be different.

Response by SSG Paul Lanciault made Feb 1 at 2015 5:58 PM

SSG Paul Lanciault — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 17:58:03 -0500

When it comes to any public office I consider a Veteran first. His or her track record in office will keep determine if they keep the office or not. I feel the values and experience gained in the military better prepare a veteran for public service.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2015 6:21 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 18:21:30 -0500

I wouldn't care as much about military service as I would about restricting career politicians from being eligible. One of the biggest problems I think we have is we have created a culture in which politicians make a career out of politics, and when they retire, go into lobbying. We, the common, working class, have little if any representation.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2015 10:58 AM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 10:58:32 -0400

I personally think that a President with Military background is a terrible thing for our country.

Response by SGT Scott Bell made Aug 30 at 2015 9:30 AM

SGT Scott Bell — Sun, 30 Aug 2015 09:30:05 -0400

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 10 at 2015 3:53 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Thu, 10 Sep 2015 03:53:04 -0400

No.. Military experience is just one of many experiences a candidate has. Jimmy Carter is the worse of the presidents in my lifetime after having served in the Navy & graduated from the Naval Academy. Although President Carter was recently diagnosed with brain cancer & dealt with it with great strength because of his religious faith. John Kerry received a Silver Star for his actions in Vietnam & I think he would have been a terrible president. He may go down in history as one of our worse Secretaries of State, if the Iran Deal becomes a disaster as many are predicting. President Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Bush(#33) all served in the military and we as a country paid a tremendous price for their decisions while they were in office.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 10 at 2015 2:50 PM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:50:40 -0400

1Lt L. Deitemeyer Have you heard about some politicians in California who used their military experiences as part of their campaign ???And what they purported was not true. We recalled Governor Gray Davis who had a campaign ad showing him receiving the Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam as an Army Captain.. The Sacramento Bee News Editor dug into this and found out Gray Davis did get a Bronze Star but not for valor because he never left Saigon where he held a few staff positions. So this false claim became part of his recall and we got rid of him for that and other reasons including incompetence....Gray Davis later blamed the Bronze Star campaign ad on an overzealous member of his campaign staff. But he never tried to remove it ..

Response by HN George Gilstrap made Sep 10 at 2015 6:53 PM

HN George Gilstrap — Thu, 10 Sep 2015 18:53:58 -0400

yes it does for me. I don't go for the political talk and I feel a president should have a military back ground as enlisted not officer then they will have a idea of the feelings before they send us in.

Response by SSG Paul Setterholm made Sep 10 at 2015 7:52 PM

SSG Paul Setterholm — Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:52:43 -0400

While I honor and respect any candidate that has served, it does not influence my vote as to his/her ability to lead the nation. Same goes for if I would want to have a beer with them (likability) i would like to get a beer with the late John belushi but that doesn't mean I think he is qualified to run the country. Trust,character,and political views is the thing that matters.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 11 at 2015 12:11 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:11:49 -0400

It doesn't really affect my vote. In some cases, a military background --just expecting results on a whim-- may actually be a psychological hurdle. But if a candidate handles him (or her) self well *AND* has a military background, I'd probably find that reassuring.

I do wish we had people run who had NCO backgrounds, though. Congress could use a few push-ups, in my opinion.

Response by SSgt David Tedrow made Sep 11 at 2015 5:38 AM

SSgt David Tedrow — Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:38:09 -0400

I think it is a great addition to the political resume but it does not necessarily make them an better than somone without military experience.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 11 at 2015 6:38 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Fri, 11 Sep 2015 06:38:06 -0400

Donald Trump went to a military school and claims that is better than serving in the military. But I would not vote for that clown if he had been in the military. But he did manage to get a deferment because of a bone spur.. And he says he would have served but for this medical issue Trump reminds me of Senator Joe McCarty the junior senator from Wisconsin who stroked our fears in the 50s but then finally flamed out after insulting just about everyone in Washington DC

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Sep 26 at 2015 7:10 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sat, 26 Sep 2015 07:10:53 -0400

Of course 21 years in Information and Electronic Warfare, I take very little at Face Value. I treat everything like an Intelligence Target.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 26 at 2015 10:19 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:19:44 -0400

No but would if General Dunford decided to run for president after he completes his new job as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs...

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Sep 26 at 2015 11:09 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:09:23 -0400

Darn, 1LT Laurie Deitemeyer, you stole my post before I could have written it. Thanks!

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Sep 26 at 2015 12:17 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:17:43 -0400

Does my military service affect who I vote for? Not directly. It affects who I am and that reflects itself in how I vote (and just about everything else). Does it affect a candidate's chances of success? It seems you have answered that question very well and I appreciate the information.

Response by CAPT Tom Bersson made Dec 13 at 2015 5:45 PM

CAPT Tom Bersson — Sun, 13 Dec 2015 17:45:48 -0500

No. There is no pass for military experience. One needs to understand their positions and philosophy. Many veterans are hawks and will quickly throw the military in harm's way without understanding the full implications.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Dec 13 at 2015 8:04 PM

SGT Jerrold Pesz — Sun, 13 Dec 2015 20:04:35 -0500

Unfortunately we have elected lots of idiots to political office both with and without military experience. While I consider military experience to be a plus it is far from the only thing that we should consider.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 7:41 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 07:41:05 -0500

I personally don't vote for the President. I vote in local elections and for congressional seats, but I have a personal issue with voting for the Commander in Chief. I think that a military background is a feather in the cap of someone and would be good for a president to have, but it comes as a part of the whole. I prefer a statesman to a warrior in the Oval Office. When it's time to let the dog off the chain, you show deference, respect and committment to those who are serving and take their advice. I firmly believe in the subservience of the military to the civilian governance.

Response by SFC Thomas Twigg made Jan 20 at 2016 8:02 AM

SFC Thomas Twigg — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:02:22 -0500

LT,

I know this was posted over year ago. Yet your post is timely today, since we about to begin the election season for President. For me, military experience is not a top priority. A candidate's values are what's important. For me, the two "big" issues I look at is the Right to Life and the Right to Bear Arms. If they have military experience that's a bonus.

Thank you for your post from over a year.

Response by MSgt Rena Schmidt made Apr 8 at 2016 3:49 PM

MSgt Rena Schmidt — Fri, 08 Apr 2016 15:49:55 -0400

Hard to be the head of a company if know nothing about it. It makes more sense to be a military member first prior to office