system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Are you supposed to vote for the candidate who you think would be best for you personally, for your country, or for the world as a whole?
gpt
Who’s to say those categories are mutually exclusive? There are arguments to be made that, as a member of a community, your interests to some degree reflect the interests of all in abstract. For instance, a candidate who runs on a platform of stable trade relations and the improvement of living conditions is (taken at their word) appealing to individuals as well as groups.

There are a few things which muddy the waters: whether a candidate can be taken at their word, whether people identify their interests with that of a community (correctly or incorrectly), and the degree to which people localize “their” community. 

Honesty in a candidate is determined in part by the actions to come, should they be elected; sometimes what is promised, when actualized, doesn’t result in the benefit previously assumed. This is tricky to parse out and so most people tend to rely on a platform’s principle over the particular promises made. This often goes against personal or communal interests, or at least beyond them in the sense we might usually think of them. A good example of this is people below the poverty line voting for a candidate proposing tax cuts for the wealthy; even though trickle down economics has been revealed to be ineffective at best, many take it on principle that this is the way it “ought” to be when it nevertheless acts to impede their own prosperity.

Identification with a community ties in with the ‘principle’ observation. Communities often enforce and reinforce these ideals, and so your notion of “best” is shaped by factors therein. Again, this is sometimes against what we might traditionally term “best interest” (standard of living, equality of opportunity, etc.) and varies based on the lived experiences within communities. 

This imposed “ought” can be narrowed depending on how niche one’s perceived community is (or broadened when one takes a more cosmopolitan standpoint). Single issue voters come to mind here, where a candidate’s appeal to one topic embodies the “ought” principle in its entirety. 

From these three points, the answer to your question is that it depends on which basis you’re using for the “supposed to” component of your question. The basis for your sense of duty/interest is going to inevitably be tied to some degree to your surroundings. Whatever metric informs your values, that “ought” that provides the basis for your political involvement, is what is implied here. So should you vote for a pro life candidate because you live in a community which holds that as a fundamental issue that you personally may or may not hold? Do you reject this stance in favor of its opposite, as a woman or as a medical professional, etc.?

It’s not a simple yes or no question.