That's a no brainer for me, since, as an emigrÃ©, I can't register. Even if I could, I'd still have to choose "none". Actually, I personally would distinguish "party affiliation" on the basis of local, state and national criteria (and, since Germany, my country of residence, is a member of the EU, international criteria), rather than any real or imagined ideology. I'm not fond of the coalition governments the German political system produces, since parties that receive as little as 5 or 6% of the national vote get an excessive amount of power, but I like the registration system. Anyone 18 or over is automatically registered to vote, and there is no party affiliation connected therewith. That form of registration would probably increase voter turnout in the U.S., but would necessitate adoption of open primaries in all states, and the abolition of caucuses. There aren't any primaries here, so candidates are basically determined by connections and political maneuvering, and, on the basis of what I see in Germany, I wholly endorse the primary election system in the U.S., except for the fact that the incumbent generally goes unchallenged. Just supposing that I could vote in the upcoming elections: I definitely wouldn't vote for Bush, because I believe he has been a national disaster, but I couldn't in good conscience vote for Kerry, as I question his leadership qualities and convictions. The way the system works, I would be left with voting for Nader, who, as an Independent, realistically has no chance. Were the "the incumbent = the automatic candidate" system not to exist, I might be tempted to vote Republican, provided that an intelligent moderate were to run. That's not the case, so my alternatives would be: stay home (convenient for me, because I can plead my disenfranchisement), vote for Nader, knowing that he doesn't stand a chance, or vote for Kerry, as the "lesser of two evils". That's a pretty bleak picture, but I would probably choose the latter course.