Friday, October 21, 2011

First to 1 million in Utah will be independents

Not to be confused with the party of no, the first bloc of Utah voters to amass 1 million voters will be the unaffiliated or as we prefer independent voters--no party or party of no thanks. On May 31 the independent voter total was 987,244. Today, October 21, 2011 the total is 998,069. Harold Camping may be predicting that the end of the world is today, but Microsoft Excel is telling me that independents will officially reach the 1 million mark at 8:22 am on December 13, 2011.

Independent voter growth was roughly twice that of republican voters during the period.

Snapshot of growth:


Calmoderate said...

This is interesting. I would not have expected it from Utah. I thought it was all Republican all the time for most everyone, no questions asked or tolerated.

Sometimes you can feel the discontent out there. It really is there. The problem is what to propose for that discontent to coalesce around?

I would respectfully submit pragmatism while rejecting or downplaying religious ideology and political ideology of the left and the right. At least that would be different and IMHO, better. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much or any groundswell of exuberance for pragmatism. Guess its just too dull.

richardwinger said...

Utah didn't have registration by party until 2001. At the November 2002 tally, Utah had 990,523 independents, 263,631 Republicans, 67,770 Democrats, 2,086 Greens, 1,836 Libertarians, 147 Reform Party members, 62 Natural Law Party members, and 81 Constitution Party members.

When a state goes from having no registration by party, to having it, at first the number of independents is overwhelmingly the majority, just because it takes time for voters to switch to a party.

Nancy Hanks said...

Calmoderate - you make a good point. Election reform is not sexy, but it's the best way to change what's going wrong in America. Let's keep up the dull fight!!!

Calmoderate said...

Oh, OK. I was not aware of that phenomenon. What happens in California, doesn't mean it happens elsewhere. I get that. Politics is interesting.

Randy Miller said...

Bullseye Calmoderate. Pragmatism isn't a glitz and glam political cause to organize protests over and yes, left right etc. etc. is really so irrelevant as to be a distration if it is paid any mind.

Calmoderate said...

I wish left and right were irrelevant, or even just less so. Unfortunately, they are the dominant viewpoints. They are apparently getting more dominant, if the polarization of the two parties is a reasonable indicator.

Given that, it seems that there are fewer chances for moderation or pragmatism to have any chance of getting serious attention and less chance of it ever becoming policy. I suspect that we are stuck until something happens to jolt/shock the status quo enough to open a chance for reason to intrude into the bizarre world of politics. Until then, it going to be business as usual, which means more failure as usual.

Randy Miller said...

Well don't give up, we can make a difference!

Nancy Hanks said...

As I see it, the left/right continuum is not relevant, though still has a weight among Dems and Repubs. It's the insider/ outsider dichotomy that's relevant now since the demise of Soviet communism in 1989. Get out! Pragmatism is not neutral, but certainly valuable!