If not for Independent voters, where would America be today, better off or far worse?

Question

I view Independents as the only moderating force within politics today. Each side counts their hystorical supporters as a done deal and avoids extreme rhetoric in fear of turning off Independents. I may be wrong. What say you?

yola_racing (below) Really like the reasoning and examples.

Answer 1

Funny question. If you are referring to the great undecided out there, that is. You offer two choices: are we better off or not better off? Yet when it comes to politics moderates seem to be the ones who have a problem with such choices.

Liberal or Conservative? The problem with independent voters is that most do not pay any attention to politics until just before an election. Such people are easily fooled by slick marketing. They can end up destroying years of hard work done by grassroots people who really understand what is at stake.

I bet you will find both Democrat and Republicans think independents are a pain in the neck.

.

Answer 2

LOL we would have no security & probably been attacked again if we didnt response the way we did after 9/11. I don't believe in republicans always know right far from it but I'm an independant because I agree & disagree with issues of both parties pretty equally & thus it seemed best to go indy. Also at the time I turned 18 if you were listed to one party you could only vote for that party be it the primary or general election & I have always felt the best person for the job no matter the party should be. Also I didnt want the junk mail. I support better education & helping less fortunate people or people fallen on hard times & especially through no fault of their own but at the same time I dont think endly taxes or endless support should happen either & I certainly think that a strong ready military & security should top the list too. I dont think the government should bail rich or business companies out all the bail nor the average joe all the time there has to be a point. My number one issue is security & that is something democrats just dont care about & when something happens they tend to send you to your room which deters noone. I give you Somalia or even Iraq after the 91 gulf war. Neither party has the answers for everything nor is either party or president the cause of things even in Iraq now. Obviously things could have been handled better but its water under the bridge & tucking tail now like in Vietnam or Somalia is just going to delay & incourage further attacks. Just like 13 attacks in 8 years with only fireing two cruise missiles in response isnt either & the democrats have no plans other then to tuck & run or withhold money from our troops which are there fighting & shouldnt be pawns. Its so politicly daily now finger pointing & trying to pass blame & it solves nothing & that turns me off even more to either party & neither party has solid people running so sadly this election & winner will do no better. It might be a new issue but the next admin will have it's own Iraq maybe it will be health care like it was in the first Clinton reign of terror or higher taxes or higher unemployement my point is that in or out of Iraq &/or afganistan the fact is the next admin while mess something else up just as big & just as bad maybe even several things. High taxes higher spending doesnt address better education or money for national insurance or health care but that's the answer for democrats is TAX TAX SPEND.... & again that's opening another new type of disaster...

Answer 3

Only 1 out of the 535 members of Congress, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, is Independent although Sanders does openly claim to be a Socialist.

The list of independents can leave no doubt that if they were successful, we would be a communist country today.

Ralph Nader:
Anti capitalism candidate ran on the independent ticket

Jesse Ventura:
Supported a unicameral (one-house) legislature, light-rail public transport, property tax reform, gay rights, and abortion rights, the use of medicinal marijuana, advocated a higher role for third parties in national politics, and favored the concept of instant runoff voting.

Ross Perot:
He hired Democrat Hamilton Jordan to run his campaign and the resulting republican party splits gave us Bill Clinton.

John Anderson:
Many prominent intellectuals, including the author and activist Gore Vidal and the editors of the liberal magazine The New Republic, also endorsed the Anderson campaign. He also had the support of many independents. Garry Trudeau's Doonesbury ran several strips sympathetic to the Anderson campaign. The hope that Anderson would score when the Democrats split in their support of Ted Kennedy and President Jimmy Carter faded when Kennedy endorsed Carter and the Democrats held together.

Henry Howell
Was a Democrat but elected to the office of lieutenant governor of Virginia as an independent and made several runs at the governor's office.
His slogan: A liberal is anyone who believes in life after birth.

Michael Bloomberg
Is a registered independent.
Supports governmental funding for stem cell research, calling the Republican position on the issue "insanity," while also supporting same-sex marriage with the rationale that “I think anybody should be allowed to marry anybody"
Is against the death penalty, stating, "I'd rather lock somebody up and throw away the key and put them in hard labor, the ultimate penalty that the law will allow, but I'm opposed to the death penalty."
Is an avid supporter of gun control stating, "I don't know why people carry guns. Guns kill people."
Has attacked social conservatives on immigration calling their stance unrealistic
"Taxes are not good things, but if you want services, somebody's got to pay for them so they're a necessary evil."

The only independent to ever run for and win the office of President was George Washington.

Answer 4

Most Americans vote for a basic political philosophy, and the candidate that most effectively reflects that philosophy. The obvious examples are Democrats and Republicans, who have opposing views of what America should be. Independants either don't agree with either of the basic opposing philosophies or they've had problems with the party that they were attached to. Voting for an independant is always a losing proposition.

Answer 5

I think about the same although a strong Independent can take votes away from a party and push the voting causing a Republican or Democrat to loose. They can cause allot of problems to the major parties,although i have voted two times Independent at Election time.

Answer 6

America would be better off.

The reason is: people who vote for third party candidate almost always would have voted Democratic if they only had the choice of the 2 parties. Having an independent party only divides the democrats and weakens that entire side of politics.

Answer 7

There hasn't been enough of them voting to make a difference one way or the other. If they were a bigger force, it would make a huge difference. However, there will always be the two party politics in this country. Thanks and have a good day!

Answer 8

You can see the answer to your question here on Yahoo... Just consider us Independent thinkers versus the indoctrinated Republican Conservatives and you see that things could have been a LOT WORSE...!!!!!

Answer 9

Are you referring to people who vote for candidates that run as independents, or people who simply aren't registered to a party?

Answer 10

Actually we're worse off.

Because there are not nearly enough independent voters.