Independent Voter

[wjh2657]

I am a free American citizen and I have the right to decide how I am going to vote. I will vote for individuals, not political parties. I will exercise my right as a free citizen to vote for the individual candidate who demonstrates to me that he or she enacts and enforces those laws that best serve me, my family and my community. I will obey the elected officials in office, they are the peoples' choice, but they must show me by their actions that they are sincere or I vote for somebody else next election! I will not vote for a candidate that casts aspersions on my religious values, family values, and patriotism or demands a party allegiance.



This is my individual manifesto. If more citizens came to some sort of philosophy to act as individuals and not party puppets and stopped voting blindly along party lines, following all of the So-called "Liberal" or "Conservative" party propaganda, the politicians would start listening to us as INDIVIDUALS. They would start running as responsible individuals instead of party hacks. They compete for only 20% of the vote because 80% of the American voters are following party lines. The nonsense has to end. If you want to work for me, show me what you are going to do for me.

[PocketProtector]

My manifesto: Throw them all out ...start over, without gerrymandered districts !!

[adymond]

There are no provisions in the founding documents that I have been able to find that require me to obey any elected official. I will obey the laws they pass as they have been elected (we should remove the gerrymandering of voting districts, but that's another discussion).

[kunsunoke]

Hate to tell you this, op, but you are not an independent voter.

None of us is independent. We rely on other people to block vote with us if we are to achieve what we desire, electorally.

In order to get exactly what you want, you will need to convince millions of other people to support the candidate that gives you exactly what you want. So you are at least relying on those other people to get what you want.

If those folks think you have a few screws loose, then your candidate is going to lose due to lack of support.

If you have a great candidate but the message is lost because it wasn't dispersed properly amongst American voters, same thing happens.

This is why political parties came into it. Nobody wants to hear this, but the parties provide muscle to get the message out for political philosophies to which a plethora of individuals subscribe. They provide the organization and the means so important to getting the vote out and getting a philosophy elected, even if the candidates themselves are lacking.

So despite our continued bitching about how bad the political parties are, we've kept voting for two main ones for the last century and a half.

As an aside, I'm sure there are several folks here that think I'm full of shit about this (and a whole list of other things as well ). But ask yourselves this question:

What specifically is innovative or revolutionary about the independent voter philosophy?

It's a reasonable question if we assume independent voters pride themselves on their individuality and free-thinking abilities - as our op seems to be proud of not serving as a "party puppet".

I often wonder, though. Is there anything really new or different there?

[d90king]

I am right behind you! I refuse to be lumped into partisan politics any longer. I find both sides to be self serving crooks!

[1861]

Hate to tell you this, op, but you are not an independent voter.

None of us is independent. We rely on other people to block vote with us if we are to achieve what we desire, electorally.

In order to get exactly what you want, you will need to convince millions of other people to support the candidate that gives you exactly what you want. So you are at least relying on those other people to get what you want.

If those folks think you have a few screws loose, then your candidate is going to lose due to lack of support.

If you have a great candidate but the message is lost because it wasn't dispersed properly amongst American voters, same thing happens.

This is why political parties came into it. Nobody wants to hear this, but the parties provide muscle to get the message out for political philosophies to which a plethora of individuals subscribe. They provide the organization and the means so important to getting the vote out and getting a philosophy elected, even if the candidates themselves are lacking.

So despite our continued bitching about how bad the political parties are, we've kept voting for two main ones for the last century and a half.

As an aside, I'm sure there are several folks here that think I'm full of shit about this (and a whole list of other things as well ). But ask yourselves this question:

What specifically is innovative or revolutionary about the independent voter philosophy?

It's a reasonable question if we assume independent voters pride themselves on their individuality and free-thinking abilities - as our op seems to be proud of not serving as a "party puppet".

I often wonder, though. Is there anything really new or different there?

Yep , I could vote for myself but would just be throwing what little my vote matters away .

[d90king]

This is why political parties came into it. Nobody wants to hear this, but the parties provide muscle to get the message out for political philosophies to which a plethora of individuals subscribe. They provide the organization and the means so important to getting the vote out and getting a philosophy elected, even if the candidates themselves are lacking.

As you said to the OP in a rather needles manner... But I hate to tell you that neither party has been getting their message or philosophies out very well as of late... They are diluting their philosophies so that they can try and have everybody like them. Whatever happened to standing up for the values that you believe in and not compromising your beliefs? Both sides are guilty...

Also why cant independents become a block of their own? When I say independents I am referring to the folks that find merit in both parties. After all I don't agree with everything that either side stands for and quite frankly I am having a hard time defining what Republicans actually stand for these days...

[kunsunoke]

As you said to the OP in a rather needles manner...

I was stating what reality is. It's a harsh reality, unfortunately. There's no way to put a happy face on it.

But I hate to tell you that neither party has been getting their message or philosophies out very well as of late...

I have to disagree. The DNC is committed to socialism, and it permeates BHO's every press release and action. Same goes for Congress. They're doing what the Left has always wanted to do - expand government, without any limits.

Prior to the election the GOP leadership said "hey, wait, we can be socialist lite, it's so much better!", but their base said "uh, no". Recipe for self-marginalization, as we have just witnessed.

How quickly things are reversed, however, when a few select conservatives actually stand up for something. Sad that it didn't happen sooner.

They are diluting their philosophies so that they can try and have everybody like them.

Again, BHO is pushing socialism, regardless of the poll numbers. Prior to the election he was doing the opposite - hiding who he really was to get elected.

The rump remnants of the GOP in congress (the conservative wing) is actually doing a good job defining, comparing and contrasting. They don't have a G. W. Bush Presidental anchor around their necks anymore.

Whatever happened to standing up for the values that you believe in and not compromising your beliefs? Both sides are guilty...

No, not really - The DNC is doing exactly what its core beliefs and philosophies dictate, right now, at this very moment. Those were just very well hidden prior to the 2008 elections.

Also why cant independents become a block of their own? When I say independents I am referring to the folks that find merit in both parties.

By "merit in both parties" you've just told us why third parties don't work.

People who pick and choose between the major parties regarding personal core philosophy tend to not be consistent. Where does one draw the line when one's own core is drawn, cafeteria-style, from two vastly different sources?

If you have a block of voters that can't agree about which party's philosophy represents them, then they're not likely to agree on a single, consistent core philosophy, either. Somebody's going to feel as though they got the shaft, which erodes a voter base within that third party.

An unscrupulous politician can come along and say they're willing to compromise, then, once elected, they can govern in accordance with their real, hidden core.

Been over half a year now since that happened on a national scale.

After all I don't agree with everything that either side stands for and quite frankly I am having a hard time defining what Republicans actually stand for these days...

As mentioned previously, the only crew left standing in the GOP is the conservative wing, and they're in no position to stop anything. We are seeing core conservatism from them, though not the party leadership.

If you can't figure out what either party stands for, even given what we've seen of late from Washington, you might consider more due-diligence research prior to the next election.

[Morel42]

My manifesto: Throw them all out ...start over, without gerrymandered districts !!

100% agree with the Districts man..

BOTH parties are guilty of that BS.. Totally in league with each other.. It's disgusting.

Also 99.9% with throwing them all out. I can think of 2 that are worth keeping.. Ron Paul and David Kucinich..

They have almost pure opposite opinions on economic policy, but both have praised each others honor and honest belief in what they say.. Which after so many years of being told whatever BS people want to hear, I'd take any day.

Give me a man of honor and intelligence who I disagree with any day then someone who will tell me whatever they think I want to hear to get elected.

[d90king]

[QUOTE=kunsunoke;890604]

I was stating what reality is. It's a harsh reality, unfortunately. There's no way to put a happy face on it.

You can get your message across with out belittling the opinion. No one needs sugar coating but sometimes class goes a long way. You are resorting to the tactics of the left... if you don't agree you are stupid etc..

I have to disagree. The DNC is committed to socialism, and it permeates BHO's every press release and action. Same goes for Congress. They're doing what the Left has always wanted to do - expand government, without any limits.

If that is their mission statement then why haven't they embraced it in plane English. I haven't heard on any of the liberal media outlets "Americas race towards socialism" please join our democratic cause of socialism. Socialism is the term others use to describe their agenda not the term they use.

Prior to the election the GOP leadership said "hey, wait, we can be socialist lite, it's so much better!", but their base said "uh, no". Recipe for self-marginalization, as we have just witnessed.

Well conservatives certainly embraced a "conservative" who embraced bigger government, more civil liberties being taken away and bailouts for major corporations. Not real conservative if you ask me.

How quickly things are reversed, however, when a few select conservatives actually stand up for something. Sad that it didn't happen sooner.

Which current elected ones are making such strong stances? I would argue with few exceptions (Jindall) that the conservatives that are not in office are doing a better job than the current base of elected officials.

Again, BHO is pushing socialism, regardless of the poll numbers. Prior to the election he was doing the opposite - hiding who he really was to get elected.

I don't disagree to a certain degree but it is far from just POTUS trying to move our country into a greater reliance in government. Congress and special interest are controlling today's agenda far more than POTUS.

[QUOTE]

The rump remnants of the GOP in congress (the conservative wing) is actually doing a good job defining, comparing and contrasting. They don't have a G. W. Bush Presidental anchor around their necks anymore.

Really which ones that are currently in office?

No, not really - The DNC is doing exactly what its core beliefs and philosophies dictate, right now, at this very moment. Those were just very well hidden prior to the 2008 elections.

Well maybe they should have kept them hidden because even their own party is not supporting the current agenda.

By "merit in both parties" you've just told us why third parties don't work.

No, what I just told you is that people refuse to be put into a box any longer being lumped into blind support for all of the things that either party has to offer.

People who pick and choose between the major parties regarding personal core philosophy tend to not be consistent. Where does one draw the line when one's own core is drawn, cafeteria-style, from two vastly different sources?

Really I have been consistent for 20 years, then I woke up and actually researched what my "party" was saying but more importantly what they were DOING. Under the guise of "conservatism". When was the last time you had somebody stand up against the constant growth of government and the corruption that comes with big government controlled by special interest?

If you have a block of voters that can't agree about which party's philosophy represents them, then they're not likely to agree on a single, consistent core philosophy, either. Somebody's going to feel as though they got the shaft, which erodes a voter base within that third party.

Interesting that you believe that people should be like sheep and follow and agree with every single issue that one set ideology represents.

An unscrupulous politician can come along and say they're willing to compromise, then, once elected, they can govern in accordance with their real, hidden core.

Hows that working out for them? They control congress yet cant garner enough support within their own party to pass their platforms number one goal without major compromise and not with the Republicans but with Democrats. Do you think they are starting to worry a little about mid terms?

As mentioned previously, the only crew left standing in the GOP is the conservative wing, and they're in no position to stop anything. We are seeing core conservatism from them, though not the party leadership.

Sadly that is a very small number these days... True conservatives that is!

If you can't figure out what either party stands for, even given what we've seen of late from Washington, you might consider more due-diligence research prior to the next election.

Sadly sir I have probably forgotten more about politics than most will learn in a lifetime. I also have discussed politics face to face with the Vice President (and I grilled him on how in the world would building a wall in Iraq do anything other than harm), a former Speaker of the House, 3 Governors and 6 Senators. I have had the chance to disagree face to face in one on one settings with some I disagree with. I have golfed, had a scotch and a cigar with ones I have agreed with.