Partisan Politics - The Question is Why

[Foxfyre]

For seven years, Rasmussen has been tracking voter registration data, and it is getting interesting. In this thread, could we keep schoolyard taunts and frontal assaults to a minimum and discuss:

1. Why do you or anybody register with a particular political party, and/or

2. Is the slowly but surely rising numbers of the unaffiliated going to be a significant factor in the coming elections?

Partisan Trends
Monday, February 01, 2010

. . . .Currently, 35.4% of American adults view themselves as Democrats. That’s down from 35.5% a month ago and 36.0 two months ago. Prior to last month, the lowest total ever recorded for Democrats was 35.9%, a figure that was reached twice in 2005. See the History of Party Trends from January 2004 to the present.

The number of Republicans is now down to 32.3%. The number of Republicans in the country has stayed between 32.3% and 34.05% in every month for the past 18 months.

The number of adults not affiliated with either major party is now up to 32.3%. That’s the highest number of unaffiliateds since the summer of 2007. . . .
Partisan Trends - Rasmussen Reports

Rasmussen notes that both the Democrats and Republican registrations have declined over the last several months so that there are now slightly more unaffiliated voters than there are those registered as Republicans and the unaffiliated are closing in on the Democrats too. As the GOP has lost somewhat more voters than the Democrats have, we can assume that it is possible that the unaffiliateds are also probably becoming somewhat more conservative.

What do you think this means?

 

[slackjawed]

I hope it means the american people are waking up to the fact that patisanship is part of the mechanism used by our so-called leaders to contrl the electorate.
Even George Washington warned us about partisanship.

 

[VaYank5150]

The more people learn to think for themselves and stop voting the party line, the better off we will ALL be!

 

[Foxfyre]

Good points guys. So. . .

If we do chunk the party lines and more people vote independent, how do you think that will affect the 2010 and 2012 elections?

 

[uscitizen]

Independent is also a party.

 

[VaYank5150]

Good points guys. So. . .

If we do chunk the party lines and more people vote independent, how do you think that will affect the 2010 and 2012 elections?

The incumbents SHOULD lose their seats. However, until our government gets away from the two party system, AND until it doesn't cost MILLIONS of dollars to get elected, I don't see the Republicans or Democrats changing their tactics much.

 

[TheSuaveOne]

In a lot of states, you have have to be registered to one party or another to be able to vote in their primaries.

-TSO

 

[VaYank5150]

In a lot of states, you have have to be registered to one party or another to be able to vote in their primaries.

-TSO

My state of Virginia is one of those states.....

 

[uscitizen]

In a lot of states, you have have to be registered to one party or another to be able to vote in their primaries.

-TSO

My state of Virginia is one of those states.....

So is KY and Independent is a party affiliation here.

but primaries are strictly a party thing and should not be financed by the govt.

 

[Claudette]

Good points guys. So. . .

If we do chunk the party lines and more people vote independent, how do you think that will affect the 2010 and 2012 elections?

I'm an Indi and I lean right. I have an Indi friend who leans left. But as an Independent I pay more attention to the person, not the party. If I llike someone who's running for office then that person will get my vote. Don't care if its a Dem or a Rep. If his message is one that I can support, he gets my vote.

This party shit just stinks. Anyone who votes for someone just because he's a Rep or a Dem is just foolish in my opinion. What does the candidate stand for, thats more important in my eyes.

 

[rightwinger]

I am a registered Republican

I registered Republican so that I could vote in the Republican primaries. My town and county are almost exclusively Republican and these positions are usually selected during the primaries

Other than that, I vote Independent

 

[uscitizen]

We almost never have an independent candidate to vote for here.

 

[Claudette]

In a lot of states, you have have to be registered to one party or another to be able to vote in their primaries.

-TSO

My state of Virginia is one of those states.....

Down here in Florida I get to for Iindependents in the primaries. I just hope that my favorite Dem or Rep makes it to the national elections. Thats the drawback of being an Indi in my State. My favorite might not make it to the Natioinal Elections.

 

[beowolfe]

For seven years, Rasmussen has been tracking voter registration data, and it is getting interesting. In this thread, could we keep schoolyard taunts and frontal assaults to a minimum and discuss:

1. Why do you or anybody register with a particular political party, and/or

2. Is the slowly but surely rising numbers of the unaffiliated going to be a significant factor in the coming elections?

Partisan Trends
Monday, February 01, 2010

. . . .Currently, 35.4% of American adults view themselves as Democrats. That’s down from 35.5% a month ago and 36.0 two months ago. Prior to last month, the lowest total ever recorded for Democrats was 35.9%, a figure that was reached twice in 2005. See the History of Party Trends from January 2004 to the present.

The number of Republicans is now down to 32.3%. The number of Republicans in the country has stayed between 32.3% and 34.05% in every month for the past 18 months.

The number of adults not affiliated with either major party is now up to 32.3%. That’s the highest number of unaffiliateds since the summer of 2007. . . .
Partisan Trends - Rasmussen Reports

Rasmussen notes that both the Democrats and Republican registrations have declined over the last several months so that there are now slightly more unaffiliated voters than there are those registered as Republicans and the unaffiliated are closing in on the Democrats too. As the GOP has lost somewhat more voters than the Democrats have, we can assume that it is possible that the unaffiliateds are also probably becoming somewhat more conservative.

What do you think this means?

I'm a registered independent most of the time. But since the two parties control the electoral system, I will re-register in order to vote in the primaries. Which party I re-register under depends on who is running in the primaries. I think more and more Americans are finding that they don't identify enough with either party to be considered a Democrat or a Republican. But as long as the primary laws are they way that they are, a lot will re-register in order to vote for a particular person in the primaries.

 

[MaggieMae]

Independent is also a party.

No, it isn't in many states. I tried to put "Independent" on my voter registration form when I moved from one town to another (same state) where I had previously been registered as a Democrat. But in order to vote, you have to put down either Republican or Democrat although in a presidential election, you're free to vote for either. Also, some states have separate primaries, where if you're a registered Democrat, you aren't allowed to vote in a Republican primary.

 

[MaggieMae]

Good points guys. So. . .

If we do chunk the party lines and more people vote independent, how do you think that will affect the 2010 and 2012 elections?

The incumbents SHOULD lose their seats. However, until our government gets away from the two party system, AND until it doesn't cost MILLIONS of dollars to get elected, I don't see the Republicans or Democrats changing their tactics much.

Following every presidential election, there's a lot of hue and cry about election reform, which spawns all sorts of academic studies, government commissions, blah blah blah because half the country is pissed off that the other half "won." But those efforts soon fade away, and nothing ever changes. Just Google "election reform" and you'll see what I'm talking about. It's always on the table, but after a year or so winds up in the garbage.

And it isn't just the process that needs to be reformed (modernized, actually), like regulating redistricting to avoid partisan manipulation, open voting with no party designation, delegate/electorate decisions, but also standardization of the voting MACHINES so that there isn't the usual occurrence of one or two states holding up an entire process because of outdated or too few voting equipment.

 

[Claudette]

I'm a registered Independent down here in Florida.

Seems kind of foolish to me to have to register as anything. You should be able to vote in the primaries and local electioins for anyone you chose. Same with the National elections. This registered thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

[Big Fitz]

Parties should be banned. Our founding fathers knew them to be a menace back then, and Andrew Jackson proved why. Now we're stuck with them till somehow legislation passes to break the party system, which I never see happening except post revolution in the next constitutional convention.

 

[Foxfyre]

Parties should be banned. Our founding fathers knew them to be a menace back then, and Andrew Jackson proved why. Now we're stuck with them till somehow legislation passes to break the party system, which I never see happening except post revolution in the next constitutional convention.

Anybody here from Nebraska? They used to have no party affiliations recognized in their legislature, and that seemed to work well for them. I wonder if it still does? I can sure see a lot of plusses for that.

 

[Foxfyre]

On another note, it seems to be the sentiment of several here that we should get away from the party system. If we do that this November, it has been suggested that the Democrats are less likely to defect from a party affiliation, and therefore we split the votes of the other half of the electorate ensuring that we elect many more Democrats to Congress. If we do that again in 2012, we would ensure Barack Obama's re-election and solidify Democrat dominance for a generation.

Is that right? Or not?