Sarah Lyons, Director of CommunicationsIndependentVoting.org
Pew Research Center released a survey last month which was encouragingly called "Beyond Red vs. Blue." Encouraging, that is, for the growing number of Americans eager to find a way out of the partisanship which has come to dominate public policy making at nearly every level of government.
The study, an 150 page analysis, was quickly digested by reporters eager to get a leg up on the latest political trends just as the Republicans held their first televised Presidential debate in South Carolina which, notably, holds both an early primary and an open primary in which independents are allowed to vote.
"Voters More Complex than Red/Blue" wrote ABC political director Amy Walter. "The Misunderstood Independent," echoed Aaron Black and Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post.
The fifth study of its kind conducted by Pew since 1987, the survey aims to give a broad overview of the character of the electorate and sorts Americans into eight cohesive groups based on values, political beliefs, and party affiliation.
Three of the eight classifications that emerged from this year's study were dedicated to independent voters, up from 2 classifications in the 2005 survey. More importantly, the presence of independents was evident across all five of the remaining classifications including those meant to define Democratic and Republican voters. In those groups, independents comprised 15% - 34% of their total makeup. Independents are everywhere it seems.
Pew acknowledged this in their report stating, "In recent years, the public has become increasingly averse to partisan labels ... There has been a sharp rise in the percentage of independents-from 30% in 2005 to 37% currently."
The survey also encouragingly pointed out that, contrary to much theorizing that independents comprise "the center" of American political life, they remain a diverse lot with strong opinions. "The growing rejection of partisan identification does not imply a trend toward political moderation, however. In fact, the number of people describing their political ideology as moderate has, if anything, been dropping," wrote Pew, acknowledging that while independents have come to played a central role in the last three national elections-this does not a "center" make.
Pew's findings amplify our own, discovered not through polling, but through the activity of organizing independents over the course of two decades. Independents are not in the middle between Democrats and Republicans. Rather, they want to move beyond the confines of parties altogether.
Perhaps more so than any other group of American voters, independents are attuned to the fact that partisanship is not a behavioral issue, it is a structural one. Since partisanship is produced by the structure of politics, addressing the issue of partisanship meaningfully means changing the political structure. That's why reforms like open primaries and nonpartisan elections are so popular among independents.
This oped has appeared in: The Granite Bay Mirror, SW News Herald, Asia American Press, Union County Pulse, Placer Sentinel, Muskegon Chronicle, California Crusader News, American River Messenger, Arden Advocate, Carmichael Times, Natomas Messenger, Orangevale Sun, Sacramento Oracle, Auburn Sentinel, and The Hankster.
Sarah is also the Chair of Staten Island Independence Party, part of the New York City Independence Party Organizations.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us 
6 comments:
Moderates and centrists make up the majority of independents, but there are plenty of moderates that are still registered D's and R's.
Those of us in the center do in fact form the base of the independent groundswell, much like conservatives form the base of the GOP and liberals form the base of the dems, but the definition independent just means "not that", so of course it would be more spread out.
"Independents are not in the middle between Democrats and Republicans. Rather, they want to move beyond the confines of parties altogether."
You mistake the indpendents YOU work with, the party haters, vs independents in general. A lot of polls include those who are already members of non-major parties as independents, and most of those independents would join up with a party if they found one that agreed with them ideologically, and/or weren't as corrupt.
"Perhaps more so than any other group of American voters, independents are attuned to the fact that partisanship is not a behavioral issue, it is a structural one. Since partisanship is produced by the structure of politics, addressing the issue of partisanship meaningfully means changing the political structure. That's why reforms like open primaries and nonpartisan elections are so popular among independents."
Partisanship is part of human nature. Your group is a partisan group, just as much as the parties are. Just saying it isn't doesn't make it so.
Groups of like minded people naturally form. The two major parties have produced unfair hurdles to the rest of us. THAT is the problem, and the fact that the rest of us haven't yet produced a movement (no matter what you folks like to pretend) to oppose them.
We have a groundswell, mostly among moderates and centrists, but also spread around the spectrum, that is waiting for something to form that they can join and be a part of. Could be a party, could be something else, but anything that creates an effective political force necessarily organizes it under a tent, even if that tent is big. Literally by definition, that ground becomes a partisan one.
I look at being an independent differently. I truly vote the candidate and never the party.
Your statement "most of those independents would join up with a party if they found one that agreed with them ideologically, and/or weren't as corrupt." I do not think is true anymore. My problem with most of the different voting processes other then "OPEN with One Ballot" is it restricts me to party choices not mine.
You are mistaking personal experience for fact.
Poll after poll have shown that a growing majority of the American public is open to a third party. The numbers themselves depend on how the poll is worded, but a huge majority says they're OPEN to a third party (over 80% of independents). A smaller majority, but still a majority of independents, say they're open to a third party presidential candidate, and a majority also says that "the two major parties do such a poor job that a third party is needed."
Not only is it true, the numbers have been trending UP for years, not down.
Joining a party doesn't have anything to do with voting for party over the individual candidate. Being a member of any sort of political organization doesn't mean you have to fall in line, and also doesn't mean that you can't support various open primary type rules, as I do.
Political parties are by far the most effective way to organize and focus political energy. We don't have to make the mistakes of the parties that have come before, and should one of the major parties get their heads out of you know where, as happened with the Bull-Moose and Progressive parties in the early 1900's, then that party can go away. But being against formation of a party carte blanch is neither smart, nor anything at all near a majority opinion of the American people, and even less among independents.
Some try to work within a system. But many think we need new systems. I think there are more of those 38% registered independents are ready for something new.
That comment reminds me of republicans who think because they love tax cuts, they don't make deficits worse most of the time, or democrats who don't think deficits matter.
You can certainly take the position that YOU think that having more parties isn't the right thing for independents, but ignoring that polling is clear that that view is not held by most independents and making a comment like that shows your ideological blindness syndrome is as severe as the partisan D's and R's.
You can't make a difference in the world if the world you see is filtered so much it doesn't resemble reality as it is.
Actually... I'll revise that last part. You can make a difference in the world if you refuse to see reality, but it never is a positive difference.
You'd think someone who's blog is called The Independent View would be more familiar with how independents actually view things...
This isn't sarcasm... I'd spend a few hours at PollingReport.com and look at what independents ACTUALLY think. You don't have to agree with them, but making silly claims on what independents want based on your personal opinions just makes you another one of those spin doctor types like you see on cable news. You can do better than that.
Post a Comment