Election Day! The majesty and beauty of this fine day has poets across the nation waxing lyrical about the greatness of our country.

Oh, who am I kidding? “Majesty” and “Election Day” in the same thought? Wednesday will come as a relief. Even we who live outside the battleground states have been through enough mudslinging, sinister advertisements and pathetic he-said, she-said debates to drive us all nutty.

Despite being ready for all of this to be over, part of me is feeling oddly philosophical as Election Day draws near. Despite all the irritations it brings, something about this time of year whispers questions in my ears. What is the fundamental nature of this democracy of ours? What are its advantages and disadvantages? How do we, as voters, make the best use of democracy?

Newspapers around the country have used their editorial space these past few days to answer this last question for us, recommending this person or that person for office. Today, dear reader, in my philosophical mood, I prefer to consider why and how we vote for representatives.

Total direct democracy in a country as big as ours — with the people voting on every single issue — is not feasible. To vote properly on every issue, we must be knowledgeable about each of them, and there is no practical way of educating the populace on the exact effects of every bill. That would be the equivalent of tomorrow’s election being held every few weeks.

One might think that I, as a so-called “high-information voter” (or, if you prefer, “political news junkie”), would be capable of such frequent voting splurges. After all, I read about politics and law almost daily.

Despite this, I have only two issues I feel qualified to vote knowledgeably on: wolf reintroduction in the lower 48 states and same-sex marriage.

That’s it. A lifetime’s fascination with politics and there are two issues — just two — I have studied enough to vote on with full knowledge of the consequences.

So, as everyone learns in their civics classes, we have a representative democracy instead. What often goes unsaid in these classes is that it is no easier for an elected representative to vote on every issue from personal expertise alone. One cannot simultaneously be an expert in law, economics (macro and micro), medicine, the environment, national defense and every other topic which has ever found its way into a bill.

Thankfully, representatives do not need to be experts; instead, they have unprecedented access to the testimony of experts in each field and the time, no, the job to acquire such knowledge before they vote.

Yet we can and often do vote for candidates based on a few black and white criteria. Are they pro-life or pro-choice? Are they for bigger government or smaller government? Do they support the auto bailout? Do they support same-sex marriage? And on and on and on. We want to make our representatives’ decisions for a few key issues for them, no questions asked.

Rarely though do those issues come up in isolation. Take abortion for instance: In the debates over the Affordable Care Act, the primary issue was not whether abortion should be legal or illegal, but rather who should have to pay for it.

We should vote for someone who can take the barrage of information surrounding an issue and condense it down to a good law, rather than having a surrogate on a single issue. In other words, we should vote for someone wise.

I will admit that I, too, have issues which can be deal-breakers and sway my choice of who to vote for, but that is because politicians who espouse those positions often come across looking unwise as a result. There have been times, though, when the appearance of wisdom has overridden my usual ideological choices.

In 2008, as I spent the Monday before Election Day researching the people on the ballot, I encountered a most interesting candidate. While he had a number of positions that I did not fully agree with, the impression I had of him was a person who actually thought about issues, rather than just toeing the party line. He earned my vote as a result.

Ultimately, he lost, but it was a pleasant reminder amid the Election Day chaos of what we strive for in this democracy of ours, and what makes it all worthwhile.

Joseph is a graduate student in mathematics. He can be reached at [email protected].