"Independent" Voters Show Their True Colors

[safeharbor37]

The problem is that some who call themselves independent mainly do so either because they can't make up their minds or because they aren't smart or interested enough to make a decision. Others are afraid to express a decision which might cause others to disapprove of them or which would require they support that decision.
Like "undecided voters," Independents can escape the necessity of justifying their positions on any real fundamental basis and just support, vote and/or join whatever is easiest at the moment. Some are truly independent, but it's hard to tell.
Almost everyone is "independent" in some sense and, although it shouldn't be condemned, it ain't nothing to brag about.

[Deleted]

Mar 17, 2011 15:59:19 GMT -5 safeharbor37 said:

The problem is that some who call themselves independent mainly do so either because they can't make up their minds or because they aren't smart or interested enough to make a decision. Others are afraid to express a decision which might cause others to disapprove of them or which would require they support that decision.
Like "undecided voters," Independents can escape the necessity of justifying their positions on any real fundamental basis and just support, vote and/or join whatever is easiest at the moment. Some are truly independent, but it's hard to tell.
Almost everyone is "independent" in some sense and, although it shouldn't be condemned, it ain't nothing to brag about.

It's like ignorant argument after ignorant argument here. Most voters are "Independent" because they don't like being pigeon-holed into having to follow some dumbass mantra based on political ideology. People who can't think for themselves are tied to a political party. Of course, that political party can change if it suits their re-election bid. Now that's classy!

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Mar 17, 2011 16:12:28 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Mar 17, 2011 15:59:19 GMT -5 safeharbor37 said:

The problem is that some who call themselves independent mainly do so either because they can't make up their minds or because they aren't smart or interested enough to make a decision. Others are afraid to express a decision which might cause others to disapprove of them or which would require they support that decision.
Like "undecided voters," Independents can escape the necessity of justifying their positions on any real fundamental basis and just support, vote and/or join whatever is easiest at the moment. Some are truly independent, but it's hard to tell.
Almost everyone is "independent" in some sense and, although it shouldn't be condemned, it ain't nothing to brag about.

It's like ignorant argument after ignorant argument here. Most voters are "Independent" because they don't like being pigeon-holed into having to follow some dumbass mantra based on political ideology. People who can't think for themselves are tied to a political party. Of course, that political party can change if it suits their re-election bid. Now that's classy!

Then have the nads to identify a position on a handful of important issues. I don't like either political party, either, because I don't like where they stand on all the issues. But I know where *I* stand. I can tell you with confidence that I am a libertarian-leaning conservative, and I can articulate a position on most relevant issues.

The lefties here can do the same.

And while we may disagree- at least we're informed, and we know where we stand.

[Deleted]

I think there are plenty of other "social issues" besides abortion. Drug laws, capital punishment, just to name a couple.

[Loopdilou]

Now that California has open primaries, I'm almost tempted to re-register as an Independent, but I'm actively involved in my local Democratic Party so I can't. The policy that I hate the most is that, as an elected Democratic Party member, I can't publicly speak out against nominees or endorsed positions. That doesn't mean I have to support them, however.

In many ways, I envy the freedom of the Independent voters when it comes to public stances (voting is always private). I find that people who register as any party or decline to state are just as likely to be uninformed as they are to be informed. Affiliation doesn't automatically make one informed. Nor does declaring oneself a particular stance (I can say I'm a libertarian leaning liberal all day long, but Paul would staunchly disagree, for instance) really mean much of anything because the terms tend to be fairly fluid and ultimately subjective.

[mmhmm]

Most Independents (including myself) do have strong stances on various issues, and most vote issues, not political parties. I can't imagine anyone who'd think it was the right thing to do to join a party with whose tenets they did not agree just because they felt they had to join something to make a point! That, to me, is ludicrous. I'd prefer to remain independent in my thinking, and Independent in my voting. Serves my needs perfectly and allows me to support that which I feel is right, not that which some political party feels is right.

[floridayankee]

Mar 17, 2011 17:01:35 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Then have the nads to identify a position

I do have the nads. Conservatives don't have a political party.

[Value Buy]

If one remembers Sheen's television show, think back to the Charlie Waffles episodes.
He thoroughly covered the idiocy of the American audience and how to make money off the people without really trying.

[floridayankee]

Mar 18, 2011 6:54:51 GMT -5 Lady Gaga Gaga Snerd said:

I have found that most independents don't really know that much about issues in general and instead of studying them, just simply don't commit one way or the other because they don't care enough to learn which side they really agree with but are more swayed by 30 sec sound bytes that sound good and appeal to them.

The repub attempts to "attack" indy's in this thread is as pathetic as the dem attacks on repubs in the 2008 election campaign.

I suppose I'll become "more educated" (aka indoctrinated) if I declare a party and start getting a recycle bin full of their propaganda in the mail?

No thank you. I haven't quite learned the correct pronunciation of bbbaaaaahhhhhhh....

When I hear people say "I'm In-De-Pen-Dent", I think of Herbie the Elf on "Rudoph the Red Nosed Reindeer" who wants to be a dentist instead of an elf!

lmao.....I looked forward to watching Rudolph (and the Grinch) every year when I was a kid.

[Deleted]

Mar 17, 2011 17:01:35 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Mar 17, 2011 16:12:28 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

It's like ignorant argument after ignorant argument here. Most voters are "Independent" because they don't like being pigeon-holed into having to follow some dumbass mantra based on political ideology. People who can't think for themselves are tied to a political party. Of course, that political party can change if it suits their re-election bid. Now that's classy!

Then have the nads to identify a position on a handful of important issues. I don't like either political party, either, because I don't like where they stand on all the issues. But I know where *I* stand. I can tell you with confidence that I am a libertarian-leaning conservative, and I can articulate a position on most relevant issues.

The lefties here can do the same.

And while we may disagree- at least we're informed, and we know where we stand.

It's cute that you make a big deal of people making Assumptions.......and then you turn around and make a grand assumption about me. Somewhat ironic don't you think?

[deziloooooo]

Mar 17, 2011 17:38:47 GMT -5 Loopdilou said:

Now that California has open primaries, I'm almost tempted to re-register as an Independent, but I'm actively involved in my local Democratic Party so I can't. The policy that I hate the most is that, as an elected Democratic Party member, I can't publicly speak out against nominees or endorsed positions. That doesn't mean I have to support them, however.

In many ways, I envy the freedom of the Independent voters when it comes to public stances (voting is always private). I find that people who register as any party or decline to state are just as likely to be uninformed as they are to be informed. Affiliation doesn't automatically make one informed. Nor does declaring oneself a particular stance (I can say I'm a libertarian leaning liberal all day long, but Paul would staunchly disagree, for instance) really mean much of anything because the terms tend to be fairly fluid and ultimately subjective.

I didn't know you can't disagree with another of the same party or their decisions?
I always was registered as I always felt my vote on a candidate would mean more, less people by far usually voting and at least a shot in picking who I favored as my partys candidate, then once in the voting booth, let the one , any party impress me for the final vote.
More bang for the buck.

I will admit, I miss the straight party ticket lever, especially for what I call the secondary , even though I know they are not, Judges, DA's, education board members, I really am just fair with those, sometimes when they come by door to door, I will chat with them and those who seemed to impress me, will make sure the cards with their names, qualifications are near the door so I can pick them up when time to vote, last one we had here, lesser offices, {My definition of}, were helpful with a few.
I know me bad but telling all how it is...

PS. I got a card signed by all the candidates kids, think he had 10, in crayon, for school board member, he got my vote, won too.

[Loopdilou]

Dez - it's only because I'm an ELECTED member of a central committee. People who register to vote as dems can say whatever the hell they want, but when you're elected and become subject to the bylaws of your parent organizations (the CDP in my case) your freedom is a little more restrained. It's really just during the campaign season though... and you can choose to NOT endorse a candidate or be neutral on a proposition, you just can't be anti the endorsed candidate or proposition.

[deziloooooo]

Mar 18, 2011 12:37:47 GMT -5 Loopdilou said:

Dez - it's only because I'm an ELECTED member of a central committee. People who register to vote as dems can say whatever the hell they want, but when you're elected and become subject to the bylaws of your parent organizations (the CDP in my case) your freedom is a little more restrained. It's really just during the campaign season though... and you can choose to NOT endorse a candidate or be neutral on a proposition, you just can't be anti the endorsed candidate or proposition.

Ok , understand. By the way congrats in your active involvement, no matter the party, I know it takes time out of your life that at times you would rather not give up.

[Loopdilou]

I'm happy to do it. What is the point of having stands on positions unless you're actively trying to see those stands made (or stay) a reality?