Why does almost every "independent" voter I talk to have strongly conservative views?

Most independents are going to be anti-government, which would correlate with conservative views.

I don't understand the term. There are a certain number of issues/concerns/moral debates on which every voter decides... so if you consider yourself an "independent," that is you don't think you side with liberal or conservative values, would that equate to an even split between the two? ... which seems quite impossible... That would have to be it, right? Because otherwise your views coincide more with one side than the other, and you'd have to consider yourself a liberal or conservative.

There are no independent-specific issues, that I know of, so I've always struggled with this. Some in my position -- that is having liberal leanings but taking from both sides -- would call themselves independents, which seems silly to me... "bucking the system" for the sake of being different and trendy.

Well, the current parties present two basic platforms: Democrats, who are (ostensibly) for greater social freedom and more control in economic matters, and Republicans, who are (ostensibly) for more control in social matters and greater freedom in economic matters. If you are a person who wants freedom in both realms or are just uncomfortable with either party's outlook, you may be an independent.

That would be the difference between "voting" independent and considering yourself fundamentally independent, no? Just based on pure ideology I don't know that it exists, but I understand how it works in the voting cycle.

Maybe it's because the Republican Party is hardly conservative anymore?

I think that's completely true, and I think one reason that Democrats are so excited over Obama is that he actually is very liberal.

It will take a while for Conservatives to stop being hung up on the religious-right, "moral issue" voters that keep wanting to insinuate the culture war.

I would strongly consider voting Libertarian if the party developed a stronger platform. Although I've voted for Greens and would probably vote Socialist if that was an option.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 99% sold on Obama this election, but third parties are really the only ones who will offer any REAL reform. Nader is simply acting as a spoiler to a candidate who will bring some necessary changes to the Washington establishment and general consciousness of the population.

Bingo.

i am an independent. i used to be registered as a democrat. my views are all liberal, but the party has been a big disappointment to me; to put it bluntly, they are a bunch of pussies

Overall im more sympathetic towards democrats, since im pro-choice and support gay marriage. My minimal state views would make me relate to the republicans, but since they say one thing but always do the opposite in that matter, i dont stick with them at all.

Democrats are hardly considered liberals by the rest of the world standards..

Exactly!

Some independents, like myself, just can't align themselves with a certain party. When it comes to the economy or foreign policy I tend to favor Republican philosophy (And I mean Republican/conservative, not these fools like GW and crew who really don't follow the philosophy). On moral issues, I just can't agree with them. Democrats allow people (for the most part) to live by their own morals (something a true Republican should be all for).

And anyway, nowadays the two parties really don't differ all that much. Both claim to want to lower taxes but neither seems to really want to cut spending. Both will most likely have us in Iraq indefinately. Both parties have expanded gov't. There's more, but you get my point. Thirty years ago, there was a sharp contrast (Carter & Reagan). Now, I'll just be independent and pick my poison (Obama), or vote third party again even though I hate feeling like I've wasted my vote.

I'm certainly anti large federal government but definately not anti government. I don't think large federal governments are very effective in their duties due to the propensity for waste. THe same is true in large corporations like say AIG where a few people or a board try and control hundreds of differnet entities under one roof. There is just too much opportunity for corruption.

I think maybe a big part of this issue is the republican party squarely aligning itself with moralists puritanical values or controlling social mores. I've always been for small protectorate national government and more powers in local government. That's not what the republican party is about.


Socially speaking I'm quite liberal. Economically speaking I'm quite conservative.

I typically vote with the libertarian party though they have thier own loons and I certainly oppose the selection of Bob freaking Barr.


I think more republicans are saying they are independants now because they completely disagree with the direction of the party and or the people that are running it wheras before, most of them voted conservative mainly because of economic policy. Bush has pretty much blown that out of the water. They might as well be burning books and goose stepping now.

Okay. So when considering a party's platform in the context of US history, that matters why exactly?