Fallacy of Voting for or against Split Government

What a thoughtful post, Fair - and nice formatting and sourcing. I tend not to take the time . . .

It is appearing in Republican Congressional races here and there, and McSame makes reference to it with his unholy troika - Obama, Reid, Pelosi. "If the Democrats control the Presidency, the House and the Senate, then . . ." the world as we know it will end, your entire life will be taxed away, child molesters will run rampant, your children will be taught there is no god, etc. etc.

The answer: vote for me, the Republican, so that the Democratic front is less unified.

The fallacy: this tactic may make sense theoretically, but people really don't follow this logic in the voting booth. They vote for their local federal legislators based on local knowledge and needs. Maybe they're generally Republican, but they like their Democratic Senator; he's done well for the state. As for the President - few vote as a tactic - I think that vote is quite independent of any other.

Sure, Michigan is one of the few states with straight-ticket voting, and I will be using that feature, as I have in every other election I've voted in save one. But most states don't have that any longer, I hear. And if these last days in the campaign are all about swing voters and independents, I don't see them doing straight party voting anyway. I think their Congressional votes will be based on local input - and for President? Maybe a last minute decision in the voting booth. But trying to maintain divided government in Washington? I doubt it.