Should campaigning candidates be missing votes while on the trail?

[DissentIsPatriotic]

Is it a good excuse? I personally think hell no.

[frazzled]

1. Yes. Unless there is going to be a very close vote where they are needed.

Let's get real. It is important that we win the WH in November. It is important that the two presidential candidates complete their campaigns.

Unless their votes are needed, it really doesn't make a big difference.

[iamjoy]

2. It's Almost Impossible Not To

Unless the candidate resigns his or her senate or house seat, it is darn hard not to miss votes.

Those in the executive branch have an easier time of it, they can bring their work with them.

Although I see the logic in requiring candidates to do their current job, such a requirement is vulnerable to manipulation by the other party. Think back to 2004 when Republicans were running Congress, do you think they wanted to make it easy for Kerry and Edwards to campaign without missing key votes?

You may think they should resign, but aren't you glad John Kerry didn't in 2004? At least we have him in the Senate if not White House. And I don't really think the Republicans want John McCain to resign when a Democratic governor would appoint his replacement.

[dflprincess]

3. Depends on what's being voted on

If it's a declaration that puppies are cute - then skip it. If it's the FISA bill, be there. Even if the outcome of the vote is known I expect them to go on the record.