What Independent Voters Want
By Marcia Ford | Related entries in IndependentsFor starters, independent voters would like the rest of America to know that we’re a force to be reckoned with, if only for the fact that we represent at least a third of the electorate and as much as 42 percent. Even if you go with the lower percentage, we still outnumber Republicans, and we’re gaining on Democrats. Still, there’s a perception that an overwhelming majority of Americans are Democrats and Republicans, plus a smattering of independents. Not so. And we’re not just an equal force, we’re also a growing force.
To give this some perspective, in 1988 only 10 percent of registered voters identified themselves as independents. That’s huge growth over two decades. With roughly 145 million registered voters in the U.S. today, politicians have 48 million of us to contend with. And they know we can make or break an election.
A second point is this: Nothing irks a true independent more than the suggestion that we’re partisans in disguise. The word “independent” has a certain rugged-individualist ring to it, the thinking goes, one that appeals to our pioneer instincts but has little to do with our voting habits. I beg to differ, and so do many of my independent friends and acquaintances. We self-identify as independents for a host of reasons, and we do not identify with either major party, nor are we “party-leaning.”
The thing is this: of course there are lots of independent voters who are independent by default — just as there are plenty of voters who are Democrats or Republicans by default. But just as I wouldn’t judge committed partisans by the uncommitted partisans in their ranks, I wouldn’t want to be judged by the uncommitted in my ranks. So let’s establish here and now that I’m talking about committed independents and the many political activists who are independent voters.
Because independents exist along the ideological spectrum — from ultra conservative to ultra liberal and all stops in between — we will never agree on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, the economy, health care, immigration, and others (although most independents oppose the war in Iraq, but often for very different reasons).
What we do agree on is the need for radical political reform, and that’s what has strengthened the growing independent movement in the U.S. I’ll get into specific political reforms another time. But what else do we have in common? Here are some characteristics of some independents (we’re too independent to agree completely on even this list):
- We’re tired of two parties whose priority is acquiring and maintaining power rather than serving the people who voted them into office.
- We have no problem voting for someone who has no chance of winning.
- We vote for the person and not the party.
- We seldom vote a straight, major-party ticket.
- We are not undecided. We have decided to be independent.
- We believe that a diversity of opinions stimulates healthy debate.
- We want dialogue, not diatribes.
- We want a government that follows the will of the people instead of one that manipulates it.
- We care as much about what happens on every other day as on Election Day.
- We want Ralph Nader to keep on running, even if we don’t vote for him. We probably need to apologize for that.
- We are anti-party, and yet we welcome third-party voters and candidates to join us under the independent umbrella, because they’re also outsiders.
- We believe the United States is better than this.
That’s just the beginning. There’s so much more we want the country to understand about us. Next time, I’ll look at some of the dirty political tricks independents are fighting against so the rest of the country doesn’t have to.
Marcia Ford is the author of We the Purple: Faith, Politics and the Independent Voter.
This entry was posted on Thursday, April 10th, 2008 and is filed under Independents. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 10th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
I’ll go a step further –
I think most independents believe that there’s a political class of some sort — “the sort of people who do politics” — and that the two parties and their elected representatives represent them more than they do us. This is a big part of why independents so often react negatively to the notion of a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton alternation: It’s further proof that politics is a game for “them” and not for “us”.
In some cases that reaches the level of conspiracy-theorism, in some cases merely despair. But what it means first and foremost is a distinctly contradictory view of “bipartisan” initiatives. In poll after poll independents want the parties to come together to “solve the problems”. And again and again they poll as at best lukewarm on and often hating the particular measure that the bipartisan wrangling actually produced — a solution that inevitably serves the needs of the political class (momentary bumps in poll numbers, good sound-bites against potential primary challengers) while doing little or nothing for the desires of the electorate.
War just amplifies this effect — while every war has two sides, if the human or monetary cost are high enough then it comes to seem like the two sides are the political elites versus the voters/taxpayers/civilians/soldiers of the participant countries. Look at the profiles of Ron Paul donors for particularly striking evidence on this.
April 11th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
I’m independent as Marcia describes…by choice for all the identified reasons. What do we need to do to have civil dialogue in politics? How can we get more voters to actually educate themselves before voting? It is our emotional response to the candidates and issues that is manipulated and exploited. ESPECIALLY when the fear button gets pushed…
Many of the non-registered citizens I talk with don’t see how politics relates to their lives…or they are so disgusted with the tone and manipulation they’ve turned away.
I’m interested in solutions…anyone have any? :)
April 11th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
While I agree with much of what Marcia says, there are a few problems with the formulation she outlines here. The single biggest problem (and it is kind of a whopper) is this:
While people may actually like to think of themselves as “Independent”, what they do in a voting booth is one hell of a lot more important than what they tell pollsters about how how they label themselves.
This is from Marcia’s blog - and gives us a more accurate picture of these numbers:
The way to read this, is that when an “independent” tells a pollster which way they “lean”, they are actually saying “this is how I vote”. So the simple reality, is that the “true independent” , who does not lean, and is equally likely to vote R or D or I , represents closer to the 12% number than the 30%-40% number that Marcia is claiming. Along these same lines. Marcia calls this group a “Voting Block”. It isn’t. A voting block, by definition, votes the same way. This group does not, therefore they aren’t. Even the 12% does not vote as a block, unless they can be organized around some principle or candidate or party or issue. Marcia has not explained what that organizing prnciple might be. If they do not vote as a block, they cancel each other out and are impotent. The major parties understand that, even if Marcia does not. That is why the reality is that the Major parties focus on Get Out The Vote efforts more so than independents. Effective GOTV swamps the independent vote - every single time.
Why is this important? Marcia appears to start with an assumption that is provably false - that independents represent a large voting block. Any logical construct that is built on that foundation, no matter how noble, or pleasant sounding, is built on sand.
Caveat: I have not read her book yet. I am going to read it and I am going to review it. What I have written here is based only on what she has written here and on her blog. Perhaps there iis a different foundation in her book. Stay tuned.
April 13th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
A pretty big whopper on it’s own:
While people may actually like to think of themselves as “Independent”, what they do in a voting booth is one hell of a lot more important than what they tell pollsters about how how they label themselves.
When the parties take the measures they have to keep people off the ballot, leaving no other names there but their own we have little choice as to what we do in the voting booth save not voting at all. Looking at the falling numbers of voters, I’d say they have made one hell of a loud statement!
Another:
The way to read this, is that when an “independent” tells a pollster which way they “lean”, they are actually saying “this is how I vote”.
What part of the writers statement didn’t you understand? “nor are we “party-leaning.” The polls you are referring to do not have real questions and a real category for people who are not of one party or the other, in order to give indication of our issues we answer in the manner which will get our points across. It is the pollsters and people like you that push us into a lean, that force us into your mold of leaners.
So here is OUR definition, every person on your census that hasn’t registered yet to vote, every person who has registered and hasn’t recently voted, every person who recently removed themselves from the R or the D party and every single person who votes on issues not party affiliation, THOSE people are your Independents. That is how many, exactly, you need to consider Independent Voters.
April 14th, 2008 at 11:13 am
[...] I pointed out in an earlier post, independent voters exist along the entire ideological spectrum and will never agree on social [...]
October 16th, 2008 at 5:33 am
Congradulations McCain for your win.
Obama should have seen to his grandmothers poverty first (years ago) before he tried to clean up Americas back yard.
Why is his grandmother still living in such abject poverty if Obama is the hero he makes out to be?
It would have taken just a few of his American dollars to help her build a better shack.
OBAMA SHAME ON YOU.
October 20th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
THINK!!!
What if the Obamas were the ones who had paraded 5 children across the stage including a 3 month old infant and an unwed pregnant teen daughter What if John mcCain was a former editor in Chief of the Harvard Law Review instead of Obama What if Obama was the one who finished 5th from the bottom of his graduating class? What if McCain had married only once and Obama a divorcee What if Obama was the one who had met his 2nd wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married?McCain did this. What if Obama was the one who had left his wife after a severe disfiguring car accident?McCain did this. What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain killers but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?Cindy McCain did this. What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard instead of Michelle Obama?? What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included discipline problems and a record of crashing 7 planes?This was McCain. What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly ,on many occasions ,a serious anger management problem?This was McCain. What if Michelle Obama`s family was the one who had made their money from beer distribution?This was Cindy McCain Think about this too: Barack Obama: Columbia University-B.A.Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations Harvard- Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude Joe Biden: University of Delaware-B.A.in History and B.A.in Political Science Sycaruse University- Juris Doctor(J.D.) Versus John McCain U.S.Naval Academy-Class rank :894 0f 899!!! Sarah Palin Hawaii Pacific University-1 semester North Idaho College- 2 semesters-general study in University of Idaha- 2 semesters-journalismMatanushka-Susitna College- 1 semester,University of Idaha-3 semesters-B.A. in Journalism THIS IS ABOUT THE 2 HIGHEST OFFICES IN THE LAND OF AMERICA AS WELL AS OUR STANDING IN THE WORLD>OPEN YOUR EYES AMERICA>THERE IS A REASON WHY AMERICA IS WHERE IT IS TODAY>>>>>THINK ABOUT WHO YOU ARE VOTING USA!!!