"Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you”


Sunday, July 1, 2007

Independent Voters Revealed as "Anti-War Extremists"

Independent voters are often viewed as the decisive power brokers in national elections. The party who successfully courts these quintessential "swing voters," typically wins presidential elections. In 2006, an unprecedented 57% of self-described independents voted Democratic (this represents an 8 point gain over the 49% Kerry got in 04) handing control of Congress to our pals Nancy and Harry.

But independents are not a monolithic group. While many in the media and public view them as the 'moderate middle' searching for the noble compromise between two intractably feuding parties, this is simply NOT true. Independents (who make up 25-30% of the electorate) are located all along the partisan spectrum.

A recently completed Washington Post/Henry J. Kaiser Foundation/Harvard University survey profiling the independent voter's diversity was reported in Sunday's WaPo. The results are fascinating - and, despite what the MSM is saying, the independent voter agrees with the Democratic base when it comes to Iraq!

Political strategists and observers make a mistake by treating these voters as one voting bloc. The media, in their never-ending quest to simplify the complex, promote the "independents as moderate" meme, providing politicians cover and an excuse to govern without conviction. We've grown weary of the familiar refrain, "The Democrats can't move too far to the left and appease their "partisan" anti-war extremist base for fear of offending the all-important independents."

The full WaPo survey can be found here (pdf!!). The responses to the poll's three Iraq-related questions reveal that independent voters are aligned with the Democratic base and want action on Iraq.

The three critical questions:
#36/37: "All in all, considering the costs to the US versus the benefits to the US, do you think the war with Iraq is worth fighting, or not? Do you feel STRONGLY that way or NOT?

"NOT WORTH FIGHTING" Responses: Indies 67%, Dems 85%, GOP 28%, Overall = 62%

#38: "Do you think the goal of bringing stability to Iraq is still possible, or not?"

"NOT POSSIBLE" Responses: Indies 62%, Dems 73%, GOP 35%, Overall = 58%

#39: "Do you think (the US must win the war in Iraq in order for the broader war on terrorism to be a success) or do you think (the war on terrorism can be a success without the US winning the war in Iraq)? (answers rotated)

"WINNING IRAQ NOT NECESSARY" Responses: Indies 62%, Dems 70%, GOP 35%, Overall = 56%

On EVERY Iraq-related question, nearly 6 of 10 independents are in the "anti-war extremist camp."

It's time for the Democratic leaders to understand this and act. If they don't it's not only the Democratic base that will punish them, but they could find the all-important independents abandoning them, as well.

The Kaiser/Harvard poll uses cluster analysis to break down this diverse group into five distinct categories, the Disengaged (24% of indies), the Disillusioned (18%), the Dislocated (16%), Deliberators (18%) and Disguised Partisans (24%). The characteristics of each group are fascinating and reveal where the Democrats should focus their energies.

The Disguised Partisans. The Democrats within this group are indies mainly because they are frustrated and angry with the Democratic Party. The Post describes this group as:
"Walking and talking Democrats, these independents lean overwhelmingly toward the Democratic Party; two-thirds always or mostly support Democratic presidential candidates.
They are more tuned in to government and politics than rank-and-file Democrats, and 13 percent said they get a lot of information about politics from blogs (the most of any group)."
This group agrees with the Dems' progressive ideology and but there is danger lurking as 93% believe Iraq is not worth fighting. More than 75% indicating they would consider voting for an independent candidate in 2008, the risk of losing these voters increases with more Iraq capitulations.

The Dislocated: Socially liberal and fiscally conservative, 46% define themselves as "progressive." Clearly, this group leans toward Democrats (57% voted for Kerry, 60% voted Dem in 06), particularly in the wake of the recently deposed GOP Congress' uncontrolled spending. The way to keep these voters is to increase transparency - and it behooves Democrats to get out in front on the issue of earmarks. More than 8 in 10 view Iraq as not worth fighting. This group is more "anti-war" than the extremist base, too.

The Disillusioned: This group feels the system is broken and are not happy with either party. They're furious with Bush and Iraq. The WaPo defines says further:
"Bush and the war are crucial components of the disillusionment.
Three-quarters say the war in Iraq was not worth fighting and just two in 10 think it is still possible to stabilize the country.
Fifty-seven percent call Bush the worst modern president.
For 2008, this group leans Democratic, but high levels of disenchantment could keep them home. They would also welcome an independent candidacy."

The Deliberators: These are the true independent swing voters - and note: they make up less than 20% of the 30% of the independent vote! They swung HUGE between '04 and '06 elections, as Bush received 66% of their support and the Dems won 52% in the midterms. Even a majority of voters within this group (55%) do not feel Iraq is worth the cost. This group will support the party and candidates that show competence.

The Disengaged: Forget about 'em. They represent 3% of voters and don't tend to vote.

Independents are Democratic-leaning voters. They are opposed to the War in Iraq. These numbers reveal that moderation isn't what a majority of independents want. They crave leadership, particularly on Iraq.

Are the Democratic leaders listening?


gwenmand said...

It's great that we independents are finally regarded enought to do polls and studies on us, but wouldn't it be even better if these groups stop creating 2-party determined categories for us to fit into. Rather than define us by how we relate to their process, maybe even they would be better served (and independents and ordinary Americans would surely be served) by finding out why the numbers of independents are dramatically increasing, and what we're concerned about.


Chrispy67 said...

I agree that the two parties would do themselves a favor by pondering why the number of independents are increasing long and hard. typically this happens when one or both of the parties fails to represent the views of the people.

Because our system is set up as a "winner takes all" and not parliamentary, the rise of a viable third (or fourth) choice is extremely difficult to sustain, unless one of the two major parties completely loses touch with the American voter.

Third party or independent movements usually raise important issue(s) that neither of the major parties is adequately addressing. Eventually, these movements are 'co-opted' by one of the major parties, essentially reforming and redefining the major party in the process.

Rose said...

I think it's time to abandon the term "Anti-war extremists" in favor of the "Pro-war extremists" Clearly the war has no support from the vast majority of Americans. The last holdouts are the people who identify as Republicans and their support has been dramatically wavering recently.

I think one thing that could be said of most Americans, whatever their political affiliation, is that we love winning and hate losing. This war was acceptable by a slim marjority of the American people when it was considered and easy win. As the years pass it becomes more obvious that we can't win, our losses become increasingly bloody and humiliating, our moral standing in the world has collasped. Libby's commutation brings the lies and trechery of the neocons' rush to bring us into an immoral war of choice full circle. The neocons will never pay the consequences of the lies and smear campaigns they waged to bring us to this point. It's we, the American people who pay and will continue to pay the price of their folly for many years to come.

The point of this rambling is that we ain't living in 1992 anymore and Ross Perot's down home, plain speaking form of right-wing politics is no longer going to serve as a rallying call for independents. As an independent I need a candidate that can call the Dems on their complanency during the Bush reign and will promise to end the war and restore Constitutional integrity to our once great nation.

Babbling on about "non-partinship" means absolutely nothing to those of us who are, in the words of the late, great Howard Beale, mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!

jeff roby said...

gwenmand misses the point. In fact, the article is a breakthrough in attempting to analyze independents as they are, rather than as some mythical centrist bloc. Specifically, it points out the existence of the Disillusioned, who are indeed fed up with the system. I fear that gwenmand wants us to equate what SHE believes with what INDEPENDENTS believe, while the point of the article is to point out the diversity of independents.

The article has created a bit of a tempest among liberal bloggers (Ed Kilgore and Matt Yglesias, among others). Their point is that the common wisdom is that the Democrats have to move to the right to capture this so-called moderate center, but this article identifies a bloc of independents to their left on the war and other issues, which they ignore at their peril.

At this historical moment, this is significant progress.

Chrispy67 said...

Rose -

Perhaps the title of the post should have had the term anti-war extremists in italics, as I was trying to make the point that the majority of Americans are actually anti-war, despite the MSM's description of the democratic base as the only portion of the population agitating for an end to the war.

The larger point I was trying to make was that the Democrats NEED to understand that it's not only Democrats but a majority of indies (with a good # of Republicans) who are asking for leadership on this critical question - and if they fail to provide leadership, there's a political price to pay.

Anonymous said...

[url=http://hairtyson.com]Phen375[/url] are tablets that resist abridge league weight. One of these tabs has to be taken with water, around 20 minutes ahead a repast, twice a day.

Anonymous said...

Hi thегe would you mind letting me know whiсh wеbhost yοu're using? I've loaded your blοg іn
3 different web browserѕ anԁ I
muѕt say this blοg lοads a lot
fastеr then most. Can уou ѕuggеst a good
web hosting ρrovider at a fair priсе?
Kudos, I appreciаte it!

Also vіsit my web-site ... used bucket trucks for sale
Have a look at my blog post : altec bucket truck

Anonymous said...

Wοndeгful blog! І found it while browsing on Yahoo
Nеws. Do yοu havе any tips on hοω tο gеt listeԁ in Yahоo Νеws?
I've been trying for a while but I never seem to get there! Many thanks

Here is my webpage Http://Www.Locateabuckettruck.Com/
My web site - boom truck

Anonymous said...

Ι'm not sure exactly why but this weblog is loading extremely slow for me. Is anyone else having this issue or is it a issue on my end? I'll cheсk back lаtеr on and ѕee іf
the problеm still еxists.

Feel free to suгf to my ρage http://www.dallasautoinsurance1.com/cheap-car-insurance-dfw
My homepage : car insurance dallas, tx

Anonymous said...

Hеllo, after reaԁing this awesome aгticle і
am aѕ well glad to shaгe my experience here with colleaguеs.

My webpage ... tens pain relief

Anonymous said...

Do you mіnd if I quotе а
few of your posts as lοng aѕ I рroѵide creԁіt аnd ѕources baсk tο уour sitе?

My blog is in thе ѵегy
same nісhе as yourѕ
and mу userѕ ωоuld genuіnеly benеfit from a lot of thе information you ргоvide
heге. Plеaѕe lеt mе
knoω if thiѕ оk with уou. Regardѕ!

My web sitе - taxi irving tx
my web page: taxi irving tx

Anonymous said...

Thanks to my fatheг whο informeԁ me on thе topic οf this
weblog, thiѕ blοg is genuіnely aweѕome.

Feel freе to visit my hοmeрagе oklahoma city roofing