Heh! I remember a friend registering for the party directly opposed to his own just so he could cast primary votes for the candidates he thought least likely to succeed. I’ve often considered doing the same, though I know it would make me a target for campaign “marketing” from said opposite camp and I don’t think I could bear it.

I know that doesn’t really have anything to do with the point of your article, but it did remind me of it. The political system is vulnerable to a lot of monkey business, and I agree that third (and fourth and fifth and so on) parties should be more viable in this country.

I choose Whig!

As a fellow independent, I appreciate the points you make. The media and political pundits, not to mention the two parties, insist on describing independents and the independent movement on their terms - eg. how it’s going to benefit one party or the other or whether an independent has a chance to win (and of course, they point out that an independent has no chance with no mention of how it got to be that way that the playing field is thorouhgly uneven).

However, by doing this, they miss some important facts. When NYC Mayor Bloomberg made the move to become an independent, he joined the ranks of a significant movement of Americans . We are a new component of the American political scene. His move has sparked a flurry of media and an important conversation about the crisis of democracy in America and the detriments of partisan politics - so we welcome him. On Saturday, June 23rd, Jacqueline Salit, the President of the Committee for a Unified Independent Party  http://www.independentvoting.org/ ) appeared on CSPAN’s Washington Journal. Ms. Salit ran Mayor Bloomberg’s campaigns on the Independence Party line in 2001 and 2005. In this show, Ms. Salit talks about the bottom-up movement that has been growing which produced the Bloomberg move. You can see the show by clicking on  ttp://independentvoting.blogspot.com/ .

Please let me know what you think after seeing the show. You can also take the 2008 Presidential Poll at http://www.independentvoting.org.

It is a critical time for independent minded Americans to be talking and creating a new movement together.

Thanks
Gwen

Robert and Gwen, thanks for the comments. Gwen, I’ll take a look.

Seems to me you join a party because you like their ideas or agree with them ideologically on most of their platform. The Primaries then become the time when you, as a member of that party, decide who the best candidate is to run for office in the General election. In the General election, you then get to vote for whoever you think is the best candidate, no matter what party.
If you don’t think your party is putting forth the best candidates for a Primary election, maybe you ought to consider changing parties so you can vote for the candidate that agrees most with your ideology.
I thought they went over all this in high school civics.

Glen, what you fail to glean from the post is that the system allows those of good ideas to be put aside, because many who would change party affiliation would be constantly doing it. When the person you want to be president is Libertarian, and you are Democrat [just an example], unless you change to be able to vote for them in the primary, it is possible that they will drop out before the general election. This is another reason why finance reform for campaigns is also needed. Thanks for dropping by.

We do have viable options. I have been a long term Libertarian, shut out of my state’s closed primary system. This year, for the first time in nearly two decades, I will be switching my registration to Republican so I can vote for Dr. Ron Paul.

Dr. Paul is the only candidate who puts Constitutional principles above party politics and his record as a Congressman from Texas bears out his dedication to honesty and fidelity.

When I talk to people about his platform and his voting record, I often hear the reply that he sounds wonderful, but he can’t win because he doesn’t have the RNC support. What a shame that many Americans won’t vote for candidates that aren’t in the main stream.

A principled vote is NEVER a wasted vote.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

«In my state, California, unless registered in the party of the candidate I wish to vote for in the primary, I cannot cast the vote I want.»

I think that’s bogus, too.

«While I’m sure from a balloting standpoint it is very tidy, it makes things very difficult for anyone who wishes to assert their differences from the major parties.»

Exactly!

«You might be totally independent in your thinking from either big party.»

Heresy!

«These, and many other reasons, show why not only should there be a vibrant third party in this country, but why the voting public should seriously consider voting for the candidate, regardless of party affiliation.»

Precisely the conclusion I’ve come to! The thought of “wasting” a vote on someone you “know” won’t get elected seems foolish at first but it’s exactly that kind of thinking that will ENSURE that we keep getting stuck with the same ilk of Bozos from one administration to the next.

Because they’re all bought and paid for by Corporate America there’s not a single mainstream candidate I like. It’s not altogether clear whether Ralph Nader’s gonna throw his hat in the ring but if he does I’ll seriously consider voting for him in the upcoming election. Then (for example) even if he “only” gets twenty percent of the votes at least the trend will demonstrate to the public that the election of a third-party candidate IS feasible.

Hey —we pretty much got Donald Rumsfeld out of office that way, didn’t we? I mean…who’da thunk there’d be such a landslide toward the Democrats in reaction to the shenanigans of the current administration? Certainly not the current administration.

«A principled vote is NEVER a wasted vote.»

I like that! Simple, and exactly right!

«Dr. Ron Paul»

I’ve been hearing good things about him, too. I’m going to look into his platform.

Mike and Steve, thanks for the comments.

Independents are merely those with strong political beliefs that either don’t fit into the latest Demo/Lib Repub/Conserv platforms, or, cross both party’s platforms.
One of the easiest ways of determining your party is to ask youself: “Do I want the government to do for more me, and my neighbors, or would I prefer to handle most things for myself…and prefer that my neighbors do the same?”
Do you want the governement “giving” you healthcare or would you prefer to “buy” it yourself?

Guys! Independent thinking is the LAST thing political parties want. Check out Hillary Clinton’s comments against individualism. People should bow to the almighty Federal government in all things.

CPMJohn, what you state in the first sentence is true, but then you say that we should define ourselves in old terms. Your statements of government vs. self don’t work anymore. Both large parties want to control the populace, they only differ in how.

I would like to see a Republican [old style] or Libertarian run on a platform of stupid law repeal. Once a committee evaluated many laws on the books, each one deemed useless, stupid, or no longer applying to current life should be put to a popular vote to be repealed. Not only are there too many laws, there are many that have no bearing on anything relating to life in the past 50 years [and that should probably be the time test].

Thanks for the comment.

Jim, I haven’t seen that one. I’ll look for it.

Thanks for stopping by.

While we’re on the subject of third parties, stupid laws, and Libertarians, I would like to point out that Congressman Ron Paul, while now a registered Democrat, has been a thorn in the side of both parties for some time. He is a man of EXTREME integrity and ran for President on the Libertarian ticket before realizing that third parties cannot be heard, so he changed to the Republican party, where’s he’s been elected in Texas 10 times in spite of both parties intense efforts to silence him. He would do away with many of the bureaucracies that torment us every day, including the IRS and his campaign is growing by leaps and bounds, driven primarily by the Internet. A longtime Libertarian myself, I am appalled to say that I must now register as a Republican so that I can vote for this fine man in the primaries. There is much information about him all over the Internet about him, and if anybody’s interested, here’s my own website about him: http://www.paulforronpaul.com.

Ooops. I said that he was a registered Democrat and didn’t notice until after I posted. Ron Paul is, of course a registered REPUBLICAN, not a Democrat. Sorry.

Paul, I knew what you meant. Mr. Paul has lots of good ideas. It would be nice to see both major parties take note.

Thanks for the comment.

Here in Arizona, the House and Senate passed a bill that elliminates the check box for “no party affiliation”. I haven’t declared a party but if I were to move into AZ, there is no way that you cannot chose none of the above.

When I voted a year ago on a recall election for a City Council position during the primaries, I had 15 minutes arguing with the poll workers to allow me to vote for that one office only. They had the ballots, but no one seemed to believe that a primary voter wasn’t with a party at all.
Is it any wonder that 3rd party canidates fair poorly; the entier system is stacked against them.

Russ, I’m sure it makes it more expedient for those who work in the election process, but as you note, it doesn’t allow the freedom we are guaranteed by the spirit of the Constitution.

Thansk for the comment.

All good points, also, in the last pres election in Texas, 180,000 people wasted their time by voting. The electoral college in Texas elected bush with 180,000 votes left over. That means for 180,000 people in Texas going to vote was a a total waste of time and effort.
The electoral college needs to be abolished. The original reason for the electoral college does not exist anymore.
One vote, one count, the one with the most votes wins.

I believe that one way for an Independent to make himself known, and appreciated, is to clearly and loudly promote ONE ULTIMATE GOAL if elected in 2008: the elimination of worldwide Islamo-Jihadism. Tell us suscinctly that you WILL chase them down, and that you WILL tap our phone and email conversations in that effort.
If one thing GW Bush has done better than it appears any of the others would have done, it’s going after the true bad guys in the world.
Tell voters that:
if the Lib Congress forces US troops out of the middle East,
and we consequently lose our close-in ability to surveil them,
and they take over the region and begin to produce nuclear weapons,
we WILL proceed to nuke the area if that’s the only way to control them!
Presented correctly, that person WILL BE elected.
Besides American lives saved, look at the financial protection it will also afford to all free nations of the world.

CPMJohn, the way you propose to make an independent known will surely lead to his/her defeat.

For most people, the war is stupid, George Bush is a megalomaniacal idiot, and Cheney is the illegitimate son of Darth Vader.

If we weren’t in those countries, the terrorists say that the attacks would not have come. I’ll be the first to say they probably can’t be trusted - BUT- what if they are being truthful? Why not give it a chance?

If we withdraw, we have time to fortify ourselves, we have time to assess the situation again, from a distance, and with a cooler eye on things.

Thanks for the comment.