The Myth of the US independent Voter

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So does the communist party.

At least as far as national elections go, we are directed to vote for Democratic candidates as a short-term strategy for beating back Republican majorities and candidates. Only a few select places are there really candidates further to the left who play a serious role in congressional or presidential elections. Mr. Sanders, for example, wins our endorsement in The Green Mountain State.

 

[kochman]

It seems to be a political law that candidates should run towards the center, and after so called "independent voters" to win elections. But is that really true?

Obama ran as a centrist and won... Kerry didn't.
Bush ran as a centrist and won... Gore didn't.

You have to get some meaningful proportion of independents... but many independents are independents not because they disagree with the two main parties, but because they don't care and don't vote.

 

[MobBoss]

At least as far as national elections go, we are directed to vote for Democratic candidates as a short-term strategy for beating back Republican majorities and candidates. Only a few select places are there really candidates further to the left who play a serious role in congressional or presidential elections. Mr. Sanders, for example, wins our endorsement in The Green Mountain State.

This almost makes it sound like card carrying communists are just a sub-set of the democrat party.

 

[JollyRoger]

Those arent political groups.

If I told you I was a member of the NRA you would probably not consider me independent, but Republican. If I tiold you I was a member of the ACLU, you would probably not consider me independent, but Democrat.

 

[downtown]

When I was registered GOP I never got anything from the Democratic Party. Ever.

Well...duh. If you don't register for either party though, depending on your voting history and personal habits, you're going to get mail and robocalls.

 

[kochman]

This almost makes it sound like card carrying communists are just a sub-set of the democrat party.

Well, they aren't voting for Bush!

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

This almost makes it sound like card carrying communists are just a sub-set of the democrat party.

It would surely be convenient for certain conservative loudmouths to regard the situation that way.

Of course, if our criticisms against the Democrats weren't just as harsh as those directed at the GOP, then it might almost be true. But as it stands our support is a tactical move, it is certainly not an endorsement of Democratic initiatives. Well, of some initiatives it is, but not of the reality: many of their party talk big and leftist, but their words never translate into actions. See: health care reform, economic stimulus, Gitmo, etc.

If I told you I was a member of the NRA you would probably not consider me independent, but Republican. If I tiold you I was a member of the ACLU, you would probably not consider me independent, but Democrat.

And if you support both?

 

[JollyRoger]

And if you support both?

Then you are either Bob Barr or me, though I would never vote for Barr.

 

[Ajidica]

What's religion got to do with this?

I think dt meant monolithic.

 

[downtown]

I think dt meant monolithic.

Yeah, I am a terrible typist.

 

[MobBoss]

It would surely be convenient for certain conservative loudmouths to regard the situation that way.

Hey, dont get your feelings all hurt for something your saying. You're the one who said you've been directed to vote democrat...not me. To quote you:

At least as far as national elections go, we are directed to vote for Democratic candidates....

Doesnt sound very 'independent' to me.

Of course, if our criticisms against the Democrats weren't just as harsh as those directed at the GOP, then it might almost be true. But as it stands our support is a tactical move, it is certainly not an endorsement of Democratic initiatives.

Now your're going to say voting for democrat candidates isnt an endorsement of their ideals?

Uhm....thats precisely what a vote is for a candidate....and endorsement of that candidate, and generally of their ideals.

 

[JollyRoger]

Uhm....thats precisely what a vote is for a candidate....and endorsement of that candidate, and generally of their ideals.

Maybe to some extent, but consider a conservative Republican atheist running against a liberal Democrat Christian. A vote for either may be for some of the voter's ideals but against others.

 

[MobBoss]

Maybe to some extent, but consider a conservative Republican atheist running against a liberal Democrat Christian. A vote for either may be for some of the voter's ideals but against others.

And just how many conservative republican atheists do you know of are running for office these days?

 

[Farm Boy]

If I told you I was a member of the NRA you would probably not consider me independent, but Republican. If I tiold you I was a member of the ACLU, you would probably not consider me independent, but Democrat.

God bless both the NRA and the ACLU. They do good work!

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Hey, dont get your feelings all hurt for something your saying. You're the one who said you've been directed to vote democrat...not me. To quote you:

My feelings aren't hurt, because I know that you're wrong. I was simply noting how some conservative hacks like to characterize the Democrats as being socialists and/or far leftists, and that your "observation" is something they would love.

Doesnt sound very 'independent' to me.

The Republicans don't sound very republican and the democrats don't sound too democratic, so I guess we're all not who we say we are.

Now your're going to say voting for democrat candidates isnt an endorsement of their ideals?

Uhm....thats precisely what a vote is for a candidate....and endorsement of that candidate, and generally of their ideals.

It's an endorsement of them over the Republicans, and the reality of today's politics is that if one of those parties loses, the other wins. The GOP is far more dangerous than the Democrats are.

It's all part of a massive ploy by us to gradually move American politics further and further left.

 

[MobBoss]

It's an endorsement of them over the Republicans, and the reality of today's politics is that if one of those parties loses, the other wins. The GOP is far more dangerous than the Democrats are.

It's all part of a massive ploy by us to gradually move American politics further and further left.

Here's a thought...why not vote for a candidate that actually espouses the ideals you believe in..like someone from the World Socialist Workers party for instance?

And if thats your 'ploy' it hasnt exactly worked. In fact, I think this last few rounds of democrats you helped elect have moved the needle further towards conservatism than liberalism or socialism.

 

[BasketCase]

Ahh, the age-old battle of "Which Religion Is the Bigger Dirtbag". Allow me to set things straight here. When you tally up the lists of atrocities, both religions have about the same....."score".....so to speak. But here's where the two differ: Christianity did some really nasty things in the past. Islam is doing those same nasty things right now. As a number of my real-world friends point out, Islam is stuck in the Middle Ages. The reason Islam gets extra Dirtbag Points is because it had the opportunity to learn from Christianity's mistakes--and didn't.

Good to have that sorted out. Now, back to topic:

In summary: most independent voters actually aren't actually very independent, and the ones that are, don't vote very often.

The independent voter actually doesn't have a lot of choices--because there's actually no clear "Centrist" party. Most political parties that are not Republicans or Democrats still commit the non-centrist sin of sailing too far off to the left or right (or both at the same time!)--the Libertarians, Peace & Freedom, the Constitution Party, or the three separate socialist parties, which as far as I know have never broken the ten-thousand-votes mark in a Presidential election. There are independent candidates who are conservative on this, liberal on that.

There IS nobody in the middle to vote for. There is no Centrist candidate out there with a coherent Moderate message.

 

[downtown]

Good to have that sorted out. Now, back to topic:


The independent voter actually doesn't have a lot of choices--because there's actually no clear "Centrist" party. Most political parties that are not Republicans or Democrats still commit the non-centrist sin of sailing too far off to the left or right (or both at the same time!)--the Libertarians, Peace & Freedom, the Constitution Party, or the three separate socialist parties, which as far as I know have never broken the ten-thousand-votes mark in a Presidential election. There are independent candidates who are conservative on this, liberal on that.

There IS nobody in the middle to vote for. There is no Centrist candidate out there with a coherent Moderate message.

Did you not read the OP? It is pretty clear that "independent" does NOT mean Centrist. That is a construct of the political media.

 

[pi-r8]

The independent voter actually doesn't have a lot of choices--because there's actually no clear "Centrist" party. Most political parties that are not Republicans or Democrats still commit the non-centrist sin of sailing too far off to the left or right (or both at the same time!)--the Libertarians, Peace & Freedom, the Constitution Party, or the three separate socialist parties, which as far as I know have never broken the ten-thousand-votes mark in a Presidential election. There are independent candidates who are conservative on this, liberal on that.

There IS nobody in the middle to vote for. There is no Centrist candidate out there with a coherent Moderate message.

If centrist is what you want, then Obama is your man. The main theme of his presidency is moderation and bipartisanship. He went after healthcare reform like liberals wanted, but he only went so far as to support the most conservative possible reform. Ditto with financial reform. He's drew down troops from Iraq, but greatly expanded the war in Afghanistan. He supports some small spending and tax increases, but mostly he proposes large spending cuts to cut the deficit. And he refuses to say whether he personally supports gay marriage.

Seriously, on every single position, he's taken the position right in the middle.

 

[Moss]

Moderator Action: Discussion about religion and politics split off. You can find it here.