So many experts... so little time...

[kentuck]

I am not an expert but I play one on Internet discussion boards.

First of all, a word or two about "independents". They are a fickle bunch. They are mostly uninformed.

In the last election, they voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama. "Oh God, the ship is sinking! Let's jump over to the Democratic boat." Now that it appears the boat is not sinking, they say, "Obama is a big-spending socialist! Let's get back on the Republican boat." Even in Massachusetts, Obama carried the "independent" vote.

Today, I am reading that Senator Chris Dodd may kill the Consumer Protection Agency that Elizabeth Warren has fought so hard to create. Why? He is retiring so it will not affect his next election. However, there are many Democrats like Chris Dodd that are more than ready to protect the big banks at the expense of the consumers. This is a problem within the Democratic Party.

It may be that Coakley will win the election today. Regardless, this is a shot across the bow of the Democratic Party. The moderates and centrists in the Party may be right on the issues but they are boring. Without passion and enthusiasm, the Democratic Party cannot survive. It will die. Or it will gradually, by degrees, morph into another Republican Party. For those willing to look closely, they may see it already happening.

If you cannot defend your position with passion, then you will be trampled under by the Republican machine. This has happened with the healthcare issue. It has happened with the stimulus plan. The Democrats were unable or unwilling to respond to the Republicans framing of the issues. Now they are where they are. They brought a slingshot to a battle where the other side had cannons. Timidity and bipartisanship, in these times, is a pathway for destruction.

It is not the progressives that are hurting our Party. It is the centrists and the moderates that are unwilling to fight. They have no passion. They are willing to compromise on anything and everything. That is why our Party is disillusioned and staying away from the polls. We have to have populism and enthusiasm and fire and brimstone to get the attention of the American people. Incrementalism is the voice of cowards.

[TexasObserver]

1. Indeed. Most "independents" are poorly informed lemmings.

They snooze off between every election, and awaken only in time to believe the ridiculous media onslaughts foisted by the right every election. Ignorant and stupid, they stumble through life, pretending they're independents, when they're really just lazy, uninformed rubes who flit back and forth between the two parties.

[lunatica]

2. Anyone still 'sitting on the wall' election eve is an idiot

And I'm not kidding. I have no use for them because talking to a wall is far more productive.

[TexasObserver]

3. I hate them. They're the reason campaign spending is a problem.

Without those clueless idiots, the late media pushes would be useless. Only the uninformed can be swayed by such blitzes. If they read the front page of their newspaper every day, they'd never need to watch election commercials again. They'd know who represented their interests.

[pipi_k]

4. Well, I don't have so much of a problem with Independents as I do with

the "undecided voters" of either party.

Although yes, some people do go "Independent" because they're too damned lazy to figure out what the issues are, so they end up voting, as I saw on the local news last night, on someone's "qualities".

I'm still stunned about that one, although I know I shouldn't be.


How much different could two candidates be on some of the major issues, is what I want to know. Surely people must have an opinion on at least ONE of those issues. An opinion that would be important enough to them so that they would be able to make a choice and not just vote for someone because he "looks like someone I'd like to have a beer with" or whatever other criteria they use for judging someone's suitability for office.


Anyway, I'm a registered Independent, but nearly all of my values are definitely on the Democratic side.

[tavalon]

5. I made my decision between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton

based on what I perceived as Barack Obama's values (no, not homophobia, but his race and class awareness. His history as a community organizer. His oratorical skill). I did not see then that there was no discernible difference between him and Mrs. Clinton.

[pipi_k]

11. Well, during a primary when the candidates can all seem pretty similar

to each other, I can see where someone would be undecided.

In other words, if one is a Democrat trying to decide between candidates who are Democrats, then it can be difficult.

But when it comes down to choosing between Republican and Democrat, they're usually not that similar. Some of the larger issues...one is either for or against Gay Rights. One is either for or against women's Right To Choose. One is either for or against social aid programs, or starting meaningless wars, or environmental protection, gun control, etc.

I just don't see how anyone could be neutral or uncaring on any of these things.

Not to the extent that they can't decide between one platform or another...

:shrug:

[tavalon]

15. I can totally agree with that

[seaglass]

6. I disagree with you. 80% of undeclared, unenrolled or "independents"

are partisan. It is only the 20% that vote any way the wind blows.

My husband, daughter and I are all unenrolled - not uninformed - and none of us would ever vote for a Republican.

"Interestingly, Obama and McCain aren't going head to head for many voters because about 80 percent of undeclared voters lean toward one party or another"

"Undeclared voters who don't lean toward a party generally "aren't especially interested in politics," said Dante Scala, a political scientist at the University of New Hampshire. "They're the ones most likely to get out for Obama because of the celebrity, the excitement, the historic nature of his campaign. I think it's going to be magnetic."

Agreed Andrew Smith, the director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center: "Most undeclareds are really partisan. This idea that there's a big bloc of people deciding between McCain and Obama, I don't see any evidence for that."'

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/24383.html

I've read additional, similar analysis on the "independents" and it rings true for me.

[kentuck]

8. I would say those 80%...

are either Dems or Repubs if they vote that way all the time. They are as partisan as everyone else but for what reason do they not want to be call a Democrat or Republican, even though they vote that way?? Just so they can call themselves "independent"?

[seaglass]

10. Probably you are right, that people like to think of themselves as

independent thinkers even if they do vote along party lines but there could be other reasons.

I know in MA pollsters call us independents and there used to be such a designation but now we only have unenrolled. I don't want to be a member of a political party so it works for me.

[pipi_k]

13. My reason for being a registered Independent

Well, the main one...I got sick and tired of the begging for money from the Democrats. Haven't been bothered since switching over.

The other reason...in Mass, anyone registered as "unenrolled" can vote in either primary.

Not that I've ever voted in the Republican primary, and likely never would.

And another reason...there are some beliefs I just will not advertise. My personal beliefs are private. If asked, I may discuss them, but otherwise, I keep my political and religious beliefs to myself in public. That means no bumper stickers, no signs in front of the house, and no clothing with religious or political statements on it.

I don't think it's anyone else's business, and I don't want to be "in your face" with my beliefs.

[hfojvt]

7. it sure seems to be progressives who are 'hating' our party

and also cheering for its defeat.

If that doesn't hurt, then it also does not seem to be part of the solution.

[kentuck]

9. I think you may be confusing "cheering" with criticism?

Because they care which way our Party is going. If we are going in the wrong direction, they are not afraid to say so. They don't stand up and cheer because we haven't hit the bottom yet. You may call that "hating the Party"? Others might say they are trying to save the Party? Or should we just say nothing and let the Party go in the direction of corporate interests, pretending they are a Party for the people?

[hfojvt]

12. some of them don't care which way our party is going

they have been enamored with 3rd parties from Day 1 even before 2006 and certainly before 2008. They seem vested in discouraging the left, trying to get more people to hate the Democratic Party. Lots of their bashing, or non-cheering is not even accurate, like the idea that the Democratic Party supported both Bush tax cuts and the Iraq war, just because our party failed to stop them. They also seem to get mad because the Democratic Party isn't socialist, and do not seem to understand that a vast, vast majority of the American public does not support socialism and probably never will. They would have bashed any health care bill that wasn't single payer. As if we live in a world where single payer is politically possible. But hey, let's bash the Democratic Party for not impaling themselves on single payer.

[kentuck]

14. So what have they impaled themselves on?

I would say the devil they chose is worse than single-payer. Not just the plan, but the political consequences also. So we get a shit sandwich without the bread?