The single issue of that voter maybe be the most overriding important issue for them, but it doesn’t mean that the consequences aren’t still a net negative for them (Or especially society as a whole).
To my previous point, they may be doing so with full knowledge or with partial knowledge. They may knows Candidate X supports Issue Y and that is their top line issue. They may not know Candidate X’s position on Issue A, B, or C.
Those positions may have an impact on what they would actually prefer to vote on.
Candidates are not single issue, even if voters are, but they often advertise them that way to limit single issue voters from knowing or caring about anything else they represent.
You can also vote for someone who says the thing you like or prefer but the reality of their plan is contradictory to the stated goal. (Preventing Medicare from negotiating drug costs will somehow make them less expensive, according to some candidates)
To be clear my point isn't to blame voters specifically. My point is that due to imperfect knowledge (Anywhere from willful ignorance to not learning enough about a candidate to the particular candidate straight up lying about things) people make choices in voting that can and do contradict their own interests.
The single issue of that voter maybe be the most overriding important issue for them, but it doesn’t mean that the consequences aren’t still a net negative for them (Or especially society as a whole).
To my previous point, they may be doing so with full knowledge or with partial knowledge. They may knows Candidate X supports Issue Y and that is their top line issue. They may not know Candidate X’s position on Issue A, B, or C.
Those positions may have an impact on what they would actually prefer to vote on.
Candidates are not single issue, even if voters are, but they often advertise them that way to limit single issue voters from knowing or caring about anything else they represent.
You can also vote for someone who says the thing you like or prefer but the reality of their plan is contradictory to the stated goal. (Preventing Medicare from negotiating drug costs will somehow make them less expensive, according to some candidates)
To be clear my point isn't to blame voters specifically. My point is that due to imperfect knowledge (Anywhere from willful ignorance to not learning enough about a candidate to the particular candidate straight up lying about things) people make choices in voting that can and do contradict their own interests.