U.S. Political Independents Don't Exist, and If We Do Exist, We Don't Matter

[Aemilius Paulus]

First off, you are confusing Independents with Moderates. The terms are not interchangeable - there are a lot of moderate Democrats and quite a number of Republicans (particularly in the north-east).

Actually, if you look closer, everyone has been using the terms interchangeably here. By independents I meant people not strongly in favour of either party, the main criteria being their predisposition to switch sides based on the few reasons I mentioned.

Further, the numbers you posted are wrong. Current Party Identification is 23% Republican, 32% Democrat and 38% Independent in polling.

Well, for one, I said roughly. You are pulling my leg if you think '25% for both sides' is a claim to an accurate statistic. Much akin to 99.9%, 50%, 95%, when someone states 'both are roughly 25%', it is assumed the statistic is not accurate, but a rough approximation, since 25% is too accurate and commonplace to be a natural, organic number.

Secondly, the statistic I read was in a sociology textbook, as I stated myself, and several years old - unlike news articles, textbooks are not up-to-date, especially when you purchase them from thrift stores, for personal enjoyment (as opposed to for school/Uni). The recent surveys, taken at the apex of Democrat power reflect a higher-than-normal amount of Democrats. I remember something like 24-29% for both Dems and GOP back when I read it.

[CountArach]

A fair point, I just wanted to point out that Democrats have a theoretical structural advantage in Party ID (though likely voters numbers even out to having something closer to a 3 point lead on election day due to the level of working class Democrats who may not be able to vote on polling day). The point stands, however, that this author has very solid grounds for believing that Independents are just as partisan as the rest of the United States and that only some 10% of people can be considered 'truly' Independent.

[Strike For The South]

I find many people who say there independent simply do so to seem more unbaised.

Not me, I vote against the incumbet every time. The only exceptions are minorities (because I don't want to be labled as a racist) and celebrities (they make so much money they must know the right thing to do.)

[KukriKhan]

I find many people who say there independent simply do so to seem more unbaised.

Not me, I vote against the incumbet every time. The only exceptions are minorities (because I don't want to be labled as a racist) and celebrities (they make so much money they must know the right thing to do.)

Heh. My woman votes against anything that will cost money. Period.

I'm beginning to see her side.

[Kadagar_AV]

I start to think that this whole conversation falls dead befire it can take off...

to have a nation of millions of citizens, and then trying to squeese them into 3 very general groups, just isnt really functioning...



I will however give this conversation a shot...


I think we can sort "true" indies from "leaners" or "more nuts than the most right/left wing of either party", by one simple question - Do you have a history of having voted for different partys?

This question then of course falls short on first time voters, or people who havent voted much.

[rory_20_uk]

Heh. My woman votes against anything that will cost money. Period.

I'm beginning to see her side.

Local, organic networks are going to be better than a centralist diktat for almost all things. There are a few strategic issues and global oversight where the State is required, but for many things the system becomes so convoluted to regulate and enforce for dynamic changes on the ground that it becomes massively unwieldy.

[Gregoshi]

...to have a nation of millions of citizens, and then trying to squeese them into 3 very general groups, just isnt really functioning...

Actually, for a country that is used to 100 different choices when buying anything, having only two major political parties doesn't make much sense anymore.

I am a registered Republican, and used to never vote for anything but a Republican. That began to change in the 90s as I started getting disenchanted with them, but still voted Republican except for Ross Perot in the '92 (can't remember if I voted for him in '96). I might have considered voting for Democrat Paul Tsongas in '92 had he got the nomination. Guess I'm a sucker for "straight talk". Anyway, I grudgingly stuck with Republicans up until 2004. Since then I do seriously consider Democrats (voted Kerry (and hated it) and Obama presidentially) but, I still had reservations about considering third party candidates. I've got a feeling I'll be looking at third party candidates a little more seriously in the next election, maybe not for president (depending upon the candidate) but more likely for lesser offices. Both major parties digust me and politics-as-usual annoys the crap out of me. It is time for a major change. The only question I have is if the rise of a third (or fourth) party will really change things.

[Subotan]

You could always vote for the Socialist Party. They've got a better track record than the Libertarian Party.

[Devastatin Dave]

Lemur, your about as Indie as I am Nancy Pelosi.

[Lemur]

Riiiiiiight, Dave, sure. Since I'm not a resident of Beckistan, I must be a liberal gay dolphin lover. Makes perfect sense.

[Gregoshi]

Beckistan?

Its capital is Kakabull right?