Today is primary day and 3.5 million Flori

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

President Obama and the Independents

Once again, I would caution Pres. Obama to read between the lines when it comes to how independent voters are characterized in the US press. Independents created our country. They were called revolutionaries then.

  • Obama leans further left (By MICHAEL GOODWIN, NY Post) One of the enduring mysteries of the Obama presidency is why he keeps leaning far left when independent voters make it clear they want a centrist in the White House. It is not an academic point -- independents swung the 2008 election his way, and without them, Obama probably can’t win a second term
  • Obama Draws New Hard Line on Long-Term Debt Reduction (By JACKIE CALMES, NY Times) In this new phase, Mr. Obama must solidify support among Democrats by standing pat for progressive party principles, while trusting that a show of strong leadership for the policies he believes in will appeal to independents. Polls consistently suggest that perhaps the only thing that unites independents as much as their desire for compromise is their inclination toward leaders who signal strength by fighting for their beliefs.


richardwinger said...

The Revolutionaries were one party, and the Loyalists (Americans opposed to declaring independence) were another party, or "faction."

People can't make a revolution unless they band together. The pro-revolution party organized, and all a "party" is, is an organization of like-minded people working for a political goal. In no sense were the revolutionaries "independent" of being in an organization.

mikey said...

As Richard points out, the notion that "independents" made the american revolution makes zero historical sense. The Revolutionary era was a time of *extreme* partisanship, as was the immediate post Revolutionary era, and it was a partisanship fueled by *real* issues of class and race and the direction America was to take. This notion that some phantasmagorical entity called "independents" represent all that is good and wonderful and holy in the world (taken to the bizarre extreme of retrospectively giving the name "independents" to all the good guys of history) while "partisans" represent all that is evil and ugly and unholy, is just plain silly. And, to state the obvious, by bifurcating the world as such, you and the independents for sale at CUIP are engaging in the highest form of partisanship.

So three cheers for partisans, who stand for something other than opportunism. Remember, it was the partisans in the forests of the world who risked and gave their lives while others capitulated to the lure of shiny things.

Unknown said...

The reason that the center appeals to most of us is not that the partisans advocate stuff. Our problem is that each side has a mythology and its followers actually believe that mythology which is why they act so strangely.
The Rs believe this stuff about all problems can be solved by lowering taxes.
The Ds believe that the programs that they want have a price tag which is only a fraction of their real cost.

mikey said...

And exactly what non-"mythological" approaches to the issues are advocated by the "most of you" who find the center appealing?