Let's get us some Independents! Put Lieberman, Bloomberg, and Ventura in charge of the party!

[DanTex]

(that's a joke)

Seriously, though, this Independent-worship thing is getting a little silly. Yeah, Bernie is an Independent, but on the whole, Independents are not a bunch of democratic socialists. The names listed in the title are much more typical of the label.

There are a lot of Is that consistently vote D or consistently vote R. Effectively, those people are either Ds or Rs already, just didn't bother to register with a party.

But other than that, independents are people who sometimes vote for Ds and sometimes for Rs (hence independent in our two party system). Which pretty much makes them low information voters. Not as bad as Republicans, of course. But still, if you even consider voting for a Republican, given today's Republican party, either you aren't paying attention or there's something wrong with you.

Because, and here's the fundamental truth that can't be gotten away from: the Democrats are better on every single issue than the Republicans. And it's not hard to see that. It's not close. There's no honor, or originality, or wisdom in failing to understand this and being "independent". Being undecided between Dems and Reps is just as stupid as being undecided about climate change, or evolution, or whether the earth is round or flat.

Do we need Independent votes to win elections? Of course. That's the way it works in politics. You can't just win with informed progressive voters. This means making some compromises. But it doesn't we need to pretend that Independents are somehow enlightened free thinkers. Because they aren't.

[stonecutter357]

1. K&R!

[NCTraveler]

2. HA Goodman!!!

Glenn Beck!!!

Let's get their vote. I questioned someone dishonestly promoting the forty percent number just that. They flat out deflected.

I'm an independent. I think the party should keep working on my vote over the two I mentioned above. Considering the platform, Dems have me big time.

[L. Coyote]

3. Isn't Ross Perot still alive?

[Lint Head]

4. Lie-berman? No.

[WomenRising2017]

5. anyone who is undecided after this election,

is unreachable.

[Tarheel_Dem]

6. This is the reason I quit listening to Hartmann years ago. He was always telling independents &

radicals that they should get in there and "disrupt" the Democratic Party. And who is his favorite politician? You guessed it. Well, they took his advice this past election cycle. They got in there and "disrupted", and at the end of the primaries, the party's infrastructure was left in near shambles.

I don't mind Independent votes, but you don't get to make the rules if you're "too principled" to join the party.

[democrank]

7. What an odd description of Independents you offered.

Independents I know ARE enlightened free thinkers who have chosen that route because they want to be....well....independent. How foolish to say they just " didn't bother to register with a party" since they vote based on issues, not party.

Angus King of Maine is a good example of an Independent thinker.

It makes no sense for Democrats to disparage Independents at the same time admit we need them to win. What foolishness. And what arrogance to say Independents are "low information" voters. It's exactly this kind of attitude that helped Democrats lose more than 1,000 state and federal seats over the last 8-9 years.

[WomenRising2017]

18. lol

These enlightened free thinkers ignored the blatant sexism/racism/bigotry of team trump.

The 2016 election proved it's time to put up, or shut up.

You either need to choose a side, start your own show, or stop bashing the one party that represents all people.

[democrank]

20. I need to choose a side?

I've been an active Democrat for five decades.

Run along now and continue your search for any pro-Bernie replies you can attach yourself to and trash.

[tonedevil]

22. I voted a straight Democratic...

in 1974. We got Jerry Brown as our Governor. Ever since then I have voted a straight Democratic ticket in every election. Why do you want to offend me? Clearly I gave chosen a side yet you want to hector me. Maybe you could learn another note to sing.

[Skittles]

25. hear that, little woman?

"run along"



don't rock the boat, whatever you do!

[WomenRising2017]

36. lol

I laugh because it's just so crazy.

[DanTex]

24. I guess we know different kinds of independents.

Some Indys I know vote straight Democratic, which makes them equivalent to Democrats. Which is fine, I don't care whether they check the box or not.

Others I know sometimes vote D and sometimes R. Mostly these are low-information, or have some right-wing leanings. These people aren't as bad as outright Republicans, but they certainly aren't any kind of enlightened free thinkers.

The problem with your argument is that, for anyone progressive, there is no difference between voting by issues and voting by party. Because one party is better than the other party on every issue. So either way, it implies voting Democratic.

[delisen]

27. What causes you to think that was the reason the 100 Democratic seats were lost?

Last edited Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Can you tie those losses to Democratic arrogance or were voters, rightly or wrongly, rejecting Democratic values and policies.

Did the ACA and misunderstandings about it give the the Tea Party victories?

Are competing organizations like Our Revolution or Organizing for America a problem?

[ProfessorPlum]

8. Corruption in either party needs to be fought

and the Democratic issues that are so good actually need to be pursued with vigor and energy, not abandoned at the first sign of a donor check.

[DanTex]

9. Sure, but right now corruption lives overwhelmingly in one party and not the other.

An essential fact that Independents like to ignore.

[LexVegas]

10. Is it just me or are most Independents older white dudes? nt

[DanTex]

11. And young white dudes too. nt

[LexVegas]

12. Yes. White dudes. nt

[klook]

13. Let's you and them fight!

Another flaming bag of dog poop on DU's doorstep. No thanks.

[George II]

14. Very good points. The funny thing is that in Connecticut there are no "independents"....

...they're known as "unafilliated"! The same is true in some other states.

[JTFrog]

21. Lol. nt

[tonedevil]

23. I have found this...

a mixed bag. There is a solid core of pretty conservative posters that think they can shame the world into doing as they want. Hope you can stick around as I get lonely, but I can understand ditching.

[KentuckyWoman]

16. lieberman.....

I'd rather have a nope sammich with a double order of nope on the side.

NOPE.

If Bernie was from any other state he'd be a Democrat. New England is just different and if he needs to put an "I" next to his name to do get elected so he can make a difference then more power to him.

If I have to make a choice between Bernie and Zell Miller when he claimed to be a Democrat then clearly, it's Bernie. In elections you do the best you can with the limitations at hand. And there are always limitations.

[Cha]

17. As if The DOOR hasn't always been OPEN to INDEPENDENTS

they let BS in, didn't they?

[tallahasseedem]

19. Most of them were Russians

anyway.

[panader0]

26. A Pew research chart (sorry no link)

showed this:
People identify as:
Independent--40.1%
Democratic--30.4%
Republican--23.7 %
I am a Democrat from a family of Democrats and have always voted D.
Independents have never had this big of a share of voters.
To me, it only makes sense to cultivate these people. Contrary to what
others have said here, most people I know that identify as Independent
are left-leaning.

[DanTex]

28. Independents, by and large, are more conservative than Democrats.

Sure, there are left-leading independents, but there are just as many right-leaning independents. And then there are centrist independents. I don't doubt that most of the independents you know are left-leaning, but there is poll data available which clearly shows that this is not a majority nationwide.

Somehow on DU (probably due to Bernie), "cultivate independents" has come to mean "move to the left". Which is totally illogical, because this would mean moving the party further away from the where most independents are. It's totally misleading to throw around that 40% number around when talking about "cultivating independents" if you're really only talking about left-wing independents, who make up a tiny fraction of that 40%.

The most straightforward way to make the party more appealing to the majority of that 40% would be to run centrists, people like Bloomberg.

[panader0]

30. My problem with centrists is that the center keeps moving further to the right.

And if that Pew poll is accurate and you are accurate (that Independents are
more conservative), then the Democrats will be outnumbered by quite a bit.

[JCanete]

32. Well, sanders thinks we can move to the left when it comes to a class-war and that that will

actually connect to people at their pocket-books. I hope he's not wrong, and I think there's some evidence that a blanket, non-partisan approach to rallying against money in politics and promoting actual "unicorn" level proposals that are tangible enough and deliverable enough to engage the imagination, resonated across party lines.

[DanTex]

37. OK, and that's a reasonable argument. I might not agree, but it's defensible.

Yeah, railing against money in politics is always a good idea. Some of the "unicorn" policies have political downsides, though. And they haven't been tested politically by right-wing attacks, because until Bernie's campaign nobody ever talked about them very much.

For example, Bernie wants the Democratic Party as a whole to support single payer. Boy, that's a risky play. The GOP would turn it into "Dems want to massively raise your taxes, kick you off of your health insurance, and force you into a government program."

And they'd kind of have a point. Because even if the single payer did end up working out and giving everybody decent care, at the very least the transition would be highly disruptive. I know that single payer polls well, and that people pack into big arenas to hear Bernie talk about it. But I'm not at all convinced that bringing policies like that into a national debate against the GOP would work out very well.

[JCanete]

38. I think we agree about how risky it is. I'm not at all convinced we'll win that fight, but its

easier for me to consider because I don't think we're winning it now. I think as much as we try to be the adults in the room, telling corporate heads and rich people, "look, lets be responsible here and not incite pitch-forks. Come to the table with us and lets work something out, " the money keeps going..."sure, here's some money because we prefer you to anything close to a socialist, and trust us, we'll totally work with you--when we have to--after our first pick loses and our other options are exhausted." And then they sick their media on the democrats anyway, and do what they can to make sure we do lose, or are so bloodied and maligned that we cant' get them to work with us when we're in office.

I think we need to scare the shit out of them and their GOP lackeys with what would be considered "extreme" legislation, just so that they cave to compromise the way our party-members are often told they need to do, for fear of something more drastic. Its obviously a different game. The media will sell the GOP narrative and trash a liberal narrative. But social media is here, and we can use it, and we can disavow corporate media too, and should. The GOP has already done that work...I say we judo it and say "that's right, corporately owned media can't be trusted," but for entirely different reasons. I mean, it will come with the territory. As soon as we step over that line in uncompromising terms, the knives will be out in the media even more viciously than they typically are. But the point is those knives are out now.

The media spin should absolutely be in question when people watch or listen to it, but it has to be viewed through an entirely different lens than what it is currently, and we have the basic evidence to back it up. Why would huge corporations be anti corporation? Why would they be trying to sell higher taxes for the wealthy? Why would they be trying to sell draconian and "fake" environmental policies? The logic is so flawed on its surface, but the media perpetuates itself as "liberal" because that is effective, and we don't challenge it.

[JCanete]

29. I think Sanders should be careful about how he promotes being an independent.

He has to realize there are people that left the party because they felt like it "had left them" or whatever, who then were barred from the process of voting for him in the primary. There isn't going to be a viable third party in this nation until we have a different voting system, which we may never have, so working within the two-party system makes sense.
So he should be cautious about making it sexy to be an independent, at least when it comes to being a voter.

That said, there are reasons to be unaffiliated as a candidate. The party might back somebody who it decides is more in-line with what leadership wants, or more in line with what they think is palatable to a certain constituency. Operating within that system can be hamstringing if decisions are made and funding support allocated that doesn't favor you.

Independents aren't necessarily undecided between Republicans and Democrats though. To assume that they are all waffling between the two parties is not at all accounting for left-leaning independents, who I suspect, typically vote for D's or Greens. As to whether they are enlightened, you can't make a blanket statement as to that whole swath of voter's enlightenment, but as I already stated, it isn't exactly strategically beneficial to register independent as far as I know, so there's that.

[JustAnotherGen]

31. Awesome OP!

[MedusaX]

33. FWIW...Peronally, I simply have no desire to "belong" to any group...

Or organization
Whether it be political, religious, social, community or otherwise.....

IMHO, Voting for a candidate simply because of the letter after their name is as illogical as trusting someone with your life savings because they have a fish on their business card....

I could not care less about "endorsements" ....
I don't Desire to blindly adopt anybody else's opinion of a candidate /policy/ issue
I prefer to form my own...

just as I would not want anyone to blindly support a candidate /policy/ issue just because I choose to support it.... that would be ludicrous...

Doesn't mean I don't want to hear what others have to say... quite the opposite....
I prefer to obtain as much info as possible from as many different sources as possible....
and after thorough analysis I can draw my own conclusions.

Sometimes I'm right... sometimes I'm dead wrong.. Sometimes in between.... but regardless of the outcome, the only person I need to hold accountable is me...


(I may be the only person on earth that feels this way... I don't know, as I do not have any data other than my own personal account to go on...)

[kentuck]

34. I have an idea...

Let's run some of those progressive "independents" in those races where no Democrats choose to challenge the Republican incumbents.

Would you vote for one of those?

[Gothmog]

35. The Democratic Party should be controlled by Democrats and not indies