Learn Hardcore Finnish: Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta, koska luotan sen arvoihin. - Most often I vote for the same party, because I trust its values.

usein = often
- Neutral, just “many times / frequently”.
- Example: Käyn siellä usein. – I go there often.
useimmiten = most often, most of the time, usually (but with the idea “in most cases”)
- Implies that this is what happens in the majority of cases, though not always.
- In the sentence, Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta suggests: In most elections, I vote for the same party.
yleensä = usually, generally
- More about what is typical or normal in general.
- Example: Yleensä äänestän samaa puoluetta is close in meaning, but it sounds a bit more like a general habit, less like a statistical “in most cases”.

Here, useimmiten fits well because voting is something that happens occasionally (elections), and you’re saying that in most of those occasions you choose the same party.

Why is there no minä in äänestän? Shouldn’t it be minä äänestän?

Finnish verb forms show the person, so the pronoun is usually unnecessary:

äänestän = I vote (the -n ending marks first person singular)
minä äänestän is also correct, but minä is only added:
- for emphasis: Minä äänestän samaa puoluetta, en sinä. – I vote for the same party, not you.
- or when needed for clarity.

In a neutral sentence like Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta, it is more natural to omit minä.

Why is samaa puoluetta in the partitive case?

Puoluetta is the partitive singular of puolue (party), and samaa is the partitive singular of sama (same).

The verb äänestää (to vote (for), to cast a vote for/against someone/something) typically takes its object in the partitive:

äänestää jotakuta / jotakin – to vote for someone / something
- Äänestän häntä. – I vote for him/her.
- Äänestän tätä puoluetta. – I vote for this party.

So:

base forms: sama puolue – same party
partitive: samaa puoluetta

You need the partitive here because of the government of the verb äänestää, not because the object is “unfinished” or plural etc. It’s just how äänestää works.

Could we say äänestän saman puolueen instead of äänestän samaa puoluetta?

No, äänestän saman puolueen is not correct in normal Finnish.

saman puolueen = genitive singular (whose? of what?):
- This form is used in structures like saman puolueen jäsen – a member of the same party.
After äänestää, you want the object form, and in practice that is the partitive:
- äänestän samaa puoluetta – I vote for the same party.

So:

samaa puoluetta – correct as the object of äänestän.
saman puolueen – used when sama puolue is in a genitive role (e.g. “of the same party”), not as the direct object of äänestää.

Why is samaa also in the partitive? How does sama decline here?

In Finnish, adjectives (including sama) agree with the noun in:

number (singular/plural)
case (nominative, partitive, genitive, etc.)

The noun puolue is in the partitive singular (puoluetta), so sama must also be in the partitive singular (samaa):

nominative: sama puolue – the same party
partitive: samaa puoluetta – (the) same party (as object of äänestän)

So samaa puoluetta is simply adjective–noun agreement in case and number.

What case and number is arvoihin, and why is that case used with luotan?

arvoihin is:

plural illative of arvo (value):
- singular illative: arvoon – into the value
- plural illative: arvoihin – into the values

The verb luottaa (to trust) normally takes an object in the illative case:

luottaa johonkuhun / johonkin – to trust someone / something
- Luotan sinuun. – I trust you.
- Luotan Jumalaan. – I trust (in) God.
- Luotan hänen kokemukseensa. – I trust his/her experience.

Here:

luotan sen arvoihin = I trust in its values
- sen – its (genitive)
- arvoihin – into (its) values (illative plural)

So arvoihin is in the illative because luottaa requires that case.

Why do we use sen in sen arvoihin? Why not niiden arvoihin?

Both sen and niiden are genitive forms, but they refer to different grammatical numbers:

sen = genitive singular of se (it / that / he / she).
niiden = genitive plural of ne (they / those / them).

The antecedent is puolue (party), which is singular, so the natural pronoun is singular:

sen arvoihin – into its values (values of one party)

You would use niiden arvoihin if you had a plural antecedent, such as:

Puolueet ovat erilaisia. Luotan vain niiden arvoihin.
Parties are different. I trust only in their values.

So sen arvoihin correctly matches the singular puolue.

Why is arvoihin plural instead of singular arvoon?

Both are grammatically possible, but they mean slightly different things:

arvoon – into its value (one specific value)
arvoihin – into its values (all / several values)

In natural speech, when talking about what a party stands for, you usually mean the whole set of its values, not just one. So the plural:

luotan sen arvoihin – I trust its values (as a whole)

is the more idiomatic choice.

Why is there a comma before koska? Is that always required?

Yes, in standard written Finnish you normally put a comma before koska when it starts a subordinate clause:

[Main clause], koska [subordinate clause].
- Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta, koska luotan sen arvoihin.

Similarly, you use a comma before conjunctions like että, koska, jotta, kun, etc., when they introduce a full clause.

Spoken Finnish may ignore this, but in writing the comma is expected here.

Can we use sillä instead of koska here? What would change?

Yes, you can say:

Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta, sillä luotan sen arvoihin.

Differences:

koska
- Subordinating conjunction, literally “because”.
- More neutral, used everywhere (spoken and written).
- Clearly marks the clause as giving the reason.
sillä
- Coordinating conjunction, also translated as “because” or “for”.
- A bit more formal or literary in tone.
- Feels like an explanation added afterwards: I usually vote for the same party, for I trust its values.

Both are correct; koska is the safest, most neutral choice.

Could we change the word order to Äänestän useimmiten samaa puoluetta, koska luotan sen arvoihin? Does that change the meaning?

Yes, that version is also correct:

Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta, koska…
Äänestän useimmiten samaa puoluetta, koska…

The meaning is almost the same. The nuance:

Useimmiten äänestän…
- Slightly stronger emphasis on “most of the time (what I do is vote for the same party)”.
Äänestän useimmiten…
- Slightly stronger emphasis on the act of voting; the “most of the time” is attached to äänestän a bit more loosely.

In ordinary conversation, they are interchangeable and both sound natural.

Are äänestän and luotan both in the present tense? How can present tense describe a habit?

Yes, both are present tense, first person singular:

äänestän – I vote
luotan – I trust

Finnish present tense, like English simple present, is used:

for habits and repeated actions:
- Käyn salilla joka viikko. – I go to the gym every week.
- Useimmiten äänestän samaa puoluetta. – I usually vote for the same party.

So the sentence describes a general habit or regular behaviour, not only what is happening “right now”.

Could we say äänestän sille puolueelle or use some other case instead of puoluetta?

No, not with this meaning.

äänestää in Finnish means to vote (for/against someone/something) and takes the object in partitive (or a related object form), not an allative like -lle.
- äänestän puoluetta – I vote for the party.
- äänestän häntä – I vote for him/her.

If you said äänestän puolueelle, it would sound wrong or at best unclear, as if you were voting to/for the benefit of the party in some non‑standard sense. The natural, grammatical way to express “vote for a party” is:

äänestän puoluetta (or with an adjective) → äänestän samaa puoluetta.