George Wallace said:
. . . . . A protest vote, just because you don't like a person without any other reason is absurd.
I would disagree. While it may not be the way you decide your ballot choice, for some it may be a perfectly valid reason. And if questioned further most who "don't like" a particular candidate or leader have probably reached that conclusion because of the candidate's performance, policies or priorities. Even if they formed their impression based on an unfavourable interaction with the candidate or his staff that is understandable. To be honest, I don't like Stephen Harper (based on my last noted reason - unfavourable interaction). I will admit that he has yet to overcome that bad first impression and it's approaching twenty years since the idiot who ran his constituency office responded to my request for assistance in sorting out a problem getting my first military pension cheque with "oh, military . . . we don't get involved with you guys because your votes don't matter in this riding". (If you hire idiots and give them authority to speak in your name, you are responsible.) By the way, I contacted the office of the MP in a neighbouring riding and I had my pension sorted out within one week. Thus, I had a lot of time for Preston Manning despite my generally unfavourable opinion of the Reform Party.
The first time I voted (over a dozen federal elections ago) I voted Progressive Conservative. There was probably some of your "absurd" reasoning in that decision. I suppose you could say that I came from a Conservative (the party, large "C", not necessarily small "c" thinking) household. Probably the big indicator was the patriarch of the family (my Grandfather) "hated" Joey Smallwood (a Liberal). PET (though not associated with that most cardinal of sins - the joining of Nfld to Canada) was painted with the same brush simply because he was a Liberal (okay, he was also a flake). In a majority of the subsequent federal elections (and a few by-elections) I generally voted along similar party lines with often (especially when I was still serving) a primary reasoning that they would be "better" for the military. I now consider that thinking to be "absurd" because I've come to believe that regardless of the party in power they will only allocate resources to the military if it is necessary to accomplish an immediate unavoidable requirement (e.g. Afghanistan) - the rest of the time, the military, as a political commitment, (though necessary) will only be given the minimum to function or a bit extra if needed to avoid political embarrassment.
However, on only one occasion has my actual personal dislike of a person formed the sole reasoning for not voting for them. Back in the 1980s, on going to the military polling place, I was surprised to discover that my riding had changed (the boundary shifted by one street past where I had declared my ordinary residence when I joined) and the candidate running for the party for which I would have normally voted had a familiar name. I was able to excuse myself from the polling place and immediately contacted my brother back on The Rock. When I asked him if the candidate was who I thought it was, he confirmed it and commented "guess he's not getting your vote - you never did like him, did you". However, my personal objections to the very existence of that individual were inconsequential in keeping him from being elected.
In later years, while I've maintained a similar political view and voted accordingly, there has been occasion when the candidate of the party who I would have normally considered did not meet my expectations - I do consider the individual who I actually vote for as well as the party platform. In the case of the upcoming federal election, I haven't made up my mind yet, but the incumbent "empty suit" in my riding (Mr. Harper is no longer my MP) is not high on my list of possibilities.
