I've set up a multi-author social blog to be used by my part-time blogger friends who don't want one of their own. Send me a note if you'd like to be able to write on For Consideration

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

What's in it for Indies?

Obviously that will depend on who you ask, and therein lies the rub for Independent organizers. Indies are disenfranchised Republicans who are dissatisfied with the economic, or lack thereof, control of the current administration, and who are not dead-set on always voting far-right "moral" issues at the expense of policy.
They are disgruntled far-right Republicans who feel this administration used them to get elected and have now seen, until recently, their issues ignored. Most of these folks will return to the Republicans leading up to the election because the Carl Roves of the world know their vote can be bought by promising moral compass changes they can't deliver.
They are liberal Democrats who recognize the Democratic party has no leadership, no viable Presidential candidates, no moral compass strong enough to support the issues they feel most strongly about.
Insert other narrow factions as you please.
Then probably the largest group are those moderate liberals (me) and moderate conservaties who largely have never wanted to be a member of a party...pure free thinkers who are allergic to cheese. Centrists they are called by many, though that's a misnomer because they all lean one way or another; and that can change depending on the issue.

I dare say they are all joined regarding the war in Iraq; but unfortunately for those who want a third party, they are upset about the war for varying reasons. Lack of planning, lack of exit strategy, anti-war, anti-nation building, feel misled...insert your own reason here. But the point is: The spectrum of these reasons run from far left all the way across to the far right. A large group of these indies are, thus, swing voters and can be brought back into the fold of the left or right with the right piece of cheese.

They are all of these groups together when it comes to political reform, a desire to at least drastically lessen the stranglehold of special interest groups on their governmental processes. But from this disparate group can a third party be formed? There is certainly an opportunity now that wasn't taken full advantage of in 1992. But many, perhaps most, don't want a third party. They are true independents who worry a third party will eventually, maybe sooner than later, have the same trappings of the other two, just trapped in a different place.

A third party can satisfy the concerns of many of these folks but whether that party has any real power would remain to be seen.

Consequently, this is what independents want in my humble opinion: They want an organization, a means, through which real reform can happen, even a viable third option on occasion; but without any allegiances. Is that possible, is that viable, is it even logical for them, us, to want?

1 comment:

Zengerite said...

Zebster, kudos back at ya.

On the national level, we need a legitimate professional politician nearing the end of a respectable career, someone with a natural constituency, to combine with a lot of money and put together a candidacy that will totally mess up the electoral map. And maybe even win.

I think Indies would have an interesting time with 3 or 4 unaffiliated Senators churning around in the media machine (rinse and spin), a machine that would love a third party candidacy. I could see these Senators voting in the Dem or Rep caucus- but also forming an Unaffiliated-Independent caucus.

Money is different from what it used to be. Money can't buy everything- it can't buy what we're doing now. Money is more readily attainable. You don't have to be Mike Bloomberg to pull this off. (Though Mike would be a "nice to have.")

John Anderson was candidate, no dough. Perot had the dough, but his 1992 withdrawal hurt him irreparably- as did his performance leading up to the withdrawal. Not a great horse.

I'll be blogging about this soon: Could Joe, not as a candidate (let's face it, he's not the greatest road act), but as endorser, lend some gravitas by aligning behind a good horse? We can get the money if we can find the horse.

You know, the big shame- IMHO- was that Dick Lamm, the former Colorado governor never got a shot with the reform party. He would have been interesting to watch in 1996.