Sorry---but I think Independents are Morans!

Is there really a choice between Repubs and Dems?

NeoCons have made life miserable for everyone but the wealthiest 1% in the world.

called Democracy, whereby the unwashed masses are permitted to vote for whomever they please regardless of party affiliation, and whereby people are not required to swear allegiance to one party even if neither party represents what they believe in.

or think party politics sucks?

or realize they're in a more powerful position than voters in each of the party bases?

so they're confused when they go to the polls?

I'm not sure if it's me or you, so it must be me.

n/t

"Is there really a choice between Repubs and Dems?"

:wtf:

you're a fucking moran. get it?

in the body of your OP. I took the sentence at face value and wasn't sure how the subject line connected to the body. But thanks to your clarification, I now clearly understand that I am a fucking moran.

:toast:

More Democrats approve of her than Republicans and she, yes she is a woman, is being groomed for National Office...Sometimes people vote for the person and not the Party...

I don't know for certain what her beliefs on that subject are. I just read an article that said she was the most popular Governor in America and had a 94% approval rating and that more Democrats liked her than Republicans. I suspect it has more to do with corruption than ideology..

and if that's what Alaskans want---that's what they get. I have no idea why a Dem would be for someone who is anti-choice.

I understand that is a hard concept for some...:shrug:

Most true Indys see party regulars in a very negative light.

Just saying...



Laura

Dems and Repugs for offices other than president.

That's an important factor explaining why the Democratic party controls the legislature in Alabama even though the state in recent elections has voted Repug for president.

Both parties only think of themselves as far as I'm concerned and until I see otherwise after this next election I trust no party at all. I did consider myself a Dem, but after all these lies and what can I say to get votes thing is crap. All I have seen in my life are politicians saying what they must to get in then crap on everyone why should they care they got what they wanted.

As far as general people I would trust a Dem before a Repube. As far as offices of the current Dems I see no difference.

Fucking clueless gits who act holier-than-thou because they refuse to soil their dainty hands with a political affiliation. Vote for stupid shit that has nothing to do with the issues.


If anyone thinks I'm being harsh, just remember that they are the sole reason there are attack ads.

It forces parties to consider them and court them. Otherwise there would be only two narrow points of view. It forces some change in both parties to get their votes.

I have a problem with them being stupid and uninformed.

and uninformed? That is a pretty broad brush there.

Trust me, independents are the worst to contact. Yes it's a generalization but I stand by it. I'd much rather contact Republicans.

Unfortunately, we have to reach out to them because there aren't enough Dems in many of our districts.

"they are the sole reason there are attack ads"


Take away the independents, and both parties will do the same thing trying to convert the moderates off each other. Its not that simple.

In the past you may have been right but most moderates have either switched parties at this point or become independent. Hence, my point.

I am not clueless. I think, and I know what I believe. I don't think I'm holier than anyone, nor do I vote for "stupid shit that has nothing to do with the issues." But I DO refuse to affiliate myself with a single party and vote only for its candidates.

"They are the sole reason there are attack ads"? What?!?!? I'm not influenced by attack ads, or any ads for that matter. I don't vote based on ads.

You and the OP seem to have made the common mistake of believing that independent = undecided or independent = don't know what I believe in or independent = I don't know what I want.

You are wrong.

I know what I want, I know what I believe, and I am not undecided about any of it. It's just that what I want is not always represented by a Democrat, or by a Republican.

Lately, it's been represented more by a Democrat, and that's why I am here.

But that doesn't mean I wish to declare myself. And I have a right not to have to.

Don't like it? Too bad. But it doesn't make me a "moran."

:) This whole thread is crap.

I'm guessing you've not done a whole lot of political activism -another common characteristic of indies is they don't like to soil their dainty hands with campaign involvement - but again that may not describe you either.

I have. When I'm canvassing I have learned to dread the houses with independent voters. I always brace myself for whatever whacked out shit might come out of their mouths. I'd say around 90% of them are utterly clueless. I worked on a state senate campaign in AZ last year and I can't tell you how many indies I made contact with who thought my candidate was running against John McCain. John McCain is a US Senator and he wasn't running for reelection. I suppose I should be happy they at least knew who one local politician was.

I'd honestly rather talk to Republicans.

I "don't like to soil my dainty hands with campaign involvement." How insulting and patronizing of you to have to phrase it that way.

I haven't done it because I haven't yet found anyone I can back wholeheartedly enough to feel comfortable doing it for. I'm also not a person who feels comfortable proselytizing in general. If I were going to be involved with a campaign it would have to be in a less evangelistic role.

Believe it or not, not every independent voter speaks "whacked out shit." And it's just patronizing and insulting of you to accuse them of doing so and to say "around 90% of them are utterly clueless." Yes, some people are clueless and uninformed, but there are plenty of others who DO know who's running and know what they want (or at least what they don't). I repeat, they are INDEPENDENT. They are not necessarily UNDECIDED. And when they are undecided, it's often because they've spent a lot of time thinking about their options and still can't come to a conclusion about which is the best to take.

In short, it's very shortsighted of you, and very insulting, to imply that picking a side and hewing to it with blind partisan loyalty is the only way for a voter to demonstrate intelligence. Just as it would be shortsighted of me to imply that all partisans were stupid binary thinkers who believe every decision in the world can and should be whittled down to an easy choice between two options, and that if you can't easily make your choice between those two options, you're an idiot.

into either D or R? and leave the rest in an amorphous blob called Independents? And how can India have a multi-party system, with 6 National Parties, and survive...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_India

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams

Blind partisanship is the refuge of ethical idiots and the intellectually indolent.

IMHO, of course.

My LOYALTY is to values and princples ... NOT some Establishment that claims exclusive 'Rights' to the political hay at harvest time.

“Freedom for supporters of the government only, for members of one party only, no matter how big its membership may be is, no freedom at all. Freedom is always freedom for the man who thinks differently."

Rosa Luxemburg

armadillos!

:hi:

Who uses a DU 733t like Moran lol! A remark on someones ignorance, that is so oft used that the individuals mistake is now in the lexicon of internet speech.

Who really got over on the whole "moran" question? The guy who made the error, or the people have made him so famous?

Some people are conservative on social issues and liberal on economic issues. Some are vice-verse. Depending on which seems more important to them at the time is how they will vote.

Alot of people have opinions about diverse topics that don't follow a straight rigid partisan ticket.

imo a whole bunch of independents always reliably vote for one party or the other but prefer not to declare on the voter registration so they claim independence.

...and I always vote Democrat. I do have a feeling that this post it directed at me since Moran is capitalized and I put up a post about voting cross-over to thwart Romney, though I could be wrong :shrug:

just kidding.

I'm glad they have other choices. That's democracy. Personally, I'd love to see the stranglehold on money and power that the 2 big parties have broken, and put all parties on an equal footing. It would keep the big 2 more honest, imo.

They also give me other choices when necessary.

she voted for Clinton, then voted for Bush twice, but now can't make up her mind between McCain and Edwards. :crazy: I kept thinking how on earth she could be that all-over-the-place and wondered what her big issue might be.

In numbers.