They all factor in. I know it's hard to pick just one. But Imma make you do it anyway.

I don't really care what party you're from.

I never agree with any party or candidate on 100% of the issues or policies anyway.

But I cannot support someone I believe to be a genuinely terrible person.

Usually by the policies/stances I agree with most, so I've never really been aligned with a particular party. That being said, this election I was most concerned with the actual person.

And policy. As DS said I usually have a blend of view points and both like and dislike individual policies from each candidate. So at the end of the day if the candidate seems like a good and honest person he/she is more likely to have my vote.

This is why the presidential system is shit. Politics shouldn't be a cult of personality, but it is. Policy - like, what the substantial consequences of electing someone are - is the most important thing in politics. I feel like voting for the person instead of the policy is placing primacy on feelings instead of engaging one's faculties of logic. Most Americans are closer to Clinton's moderate views than Trump's more extremist positions. Yet we have the latter as president.

So you'd rather vote for a sack of human garbage that holds (or claims to hold) 90% of your values than a decent person who matches 70% of them?

Idk how to respond to that hypothetical. But I fundamentally approach things with a utilitarian view: which option will help the greatest number of people and the world generally, now and into the future? That is what the decision would be based on. And assessment of the person's worth would certainly play into that. But in the sense that it would have tangible consequences (and of course it would), not because of character in and of itself. It's a fine distinction and I don't know if I explained it very well. Basically the appraisal of their decency comes from a different source and for different reasons. But it still very much plays into things.

In any case: I've never encountered a politician that holds 90% of my values yet is human garbage. I value rationality, compassion, scientific literacy, secularism, human rights, fairness, humanism. The people I've met that hold these positions all have had an agreeable character (in my eyes).

I voted for Trump in 2016 for the same reason I voted for Romney in 2012: better policy (and being opposed to the policies of their Democratic opponents). The fact that Trump is, for example, more Twitter-happy than Clinton didn't matter to me.

Character flaws and temperament can be legitimate concerns, but they're concerns better addressed in primaries. Once there's a general election, stopping the policies of the opposition becomes the only thing that matters.