Does it make sense to elect someone based on ideology or is it better to elect more of a “judge”/technocrat type candidate like Aaltola?
Does it make sense to elect someone based on ideology or is it better to elect more of a “judge”/technocrat type candidate like Aaltola?
As a concept, yes.
What doesn’t make sense is to not vote, vote empty or Donald Duck, or vote a random candidate, or ask a friend who are they voting and just blindly do the same. Probably other ways that don’t make sense too, but that’s at least a few off the top of my head.
Only thing that does make sense is to look into each candidate, then think about what’s important to you, and vote for the one who seems to be the best candidate in your opinion. Use what ever values or metrics that you find important to you.
The candidates are all qualified for the job, and the position holds not much real-world power, at least nowhere enough to cause mayhem like what was seen a few years ago in the U.S. So really, we’ll be fine with any one of them. Worst thing that can happen is six years of cringe and bad memes, but very little damage to anything or anyone.
There are a couple of candidates I would not like to see as president. Mostly because I don’t like their politics, but also because people listen to what the president says.
Halla-Aho as president would be a bit of a disaster, at the very least from a PR standpoint but also because it’d embolden the extremist right wing he represents. I don’t want the country’s representative to be someone who has eg. publicly fantasized about shooting a gay person and who has some very interesting opinions about Breivik (and who Breivik has said is one of his political inspirations)
