Skip to comments.What Independents Want(From a NYT happy "Conservative" Columnist)
Posted on 11/07/2009 2:51:49 AM PST by Thebaddog
Liberals and conservatives each have their own intellectual food chains. They have their own think tanks to provide arguments, politicians and pundits to amplify them, and news media outlets to deliver streams of prejudice-affirming stories.
David Brooks Go to Columnist Page » The Conversation David Brooks and Gail Collins talk between columns. All Conversations » Readers' Comments Readers shared their thoughts on this article. Read All Comments (316) » Independents, who are the largest group in the electorate, dont have any of this. They dont have institutional affiliations. They dont look to certain activist lobbies for guidance. There arent many commentators who come from an independent perspective.
Independents are herds of cats who find out what they think through a meandering process of discovery. Right now, independent voters are astonishingly volatile. Democrats did poorly in elections on Tuesday partly because of disappointed liberals who think that President Obama is moving too slowly, but mostly because of anxious suburban independents who think he is moving too fast. In Pennsylvania, there was an eight-point swing away from the Democrats among independents from a year ago. In New Jersey, there was a 12-point swing. In Virginia, there was a 13-point swing.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Brooks is missing the point that there are now a lot of former Republicans who are calling themselves Independent until the GOP gets the message and completely retools.
In August, polling showed that a significant (election changing) percentage of otherwise apolitical Independents agreed-in-principle with the conservative/libertarian (small’c’ and small ‘l’) message of the Tea Party Movement....
The Bipartisan Washington Elite Establishment ignores this to its own peril....
I grew up in NC and moved to Va. When you register to vote in Va it’s as and independent. When I moved back to NC was so pissed @ the GOP for becoming Democrat lite and registered as and independent. I’m actually a conservative. Jesse Helms is my hero.
Yrp, Brooks always misses the point. He’s as delusional as any other NYTImens faux Conservative.
You seem unwilling to address the fact that “independents” were attracted to the Dems by a set of carefully constructed campaign lies by the Democrat Party Propaganda machine.
How quickly Mr Brooks you forget the 2008 promises of your idol Dear Reader i.e. “Tax cuts for 95% of Americans) “Most transparent Administration in History” “Energy Independence in 10 years) etc etc etc
What is the one thing the bulk of “Independents” consistently vote against? Fiscally irresponsible spending and corruption.
They fired Bush and the GOP based on the notion that they had become entranced in the corrupt practices of DC and were irresponsible with the people's money.
They hired Obama on the mistaken notion that he was going to ride into DC clean up the corruption (Most open administration in history) who would be a “post racial” president while giving “tax cuts to 95% of Americans”.
Slowly, because the “Independents” are sheep easily lead by the Junk Media, the “Independents” are waking up to the fact that Dear Reader is every bit as corrupt while being even more irresponsible with the Public Purse.
Independents are at heart conservatives in outlook. The recent Gallup poll validated that data.
A bold Conservative agenda that focuses on the traditional values of the USA (fiscal responsibility, open, honest, smaller Government, moral accountability in leadership, a principled strong national defense, while also presenting a serious rational approach for addressing such issues as Energy Independence, real health insurance reform, and lead by someone untainted by the inherent corruption of DC will attract them in droves to GOP candidates. It did last week in VA, in NJ, and it will in 2010
Brooks is the same guy who said “Obama is just a mountain, he is always there”.
I’ll tell him what I want. I want a government that lives within its means.
To varying degrees substantial numbers of voters are schizophrenic. These voters often demand actions that are contradictory. For example, they demand more programs and then complain about government spending. Because the programs these voters demand often affect the rights of others who in turn look to lobbyists to present their views. Then those who demanded these new programs bellyache about lobbyists. Some people aren’t happy unless they have something to complain about.
Malarkey. The "independents" fired the Republicans because of the execrable execution of the war when it segued into interminable "nation building". Read up on the "Jacksonian" political perspective.
"Slowly, because the Independents are sheep easily lead by the Junk Media........"
I think you will find that true independents are LESS easily led by the media than members of EITHER party. A person who deliberately refuses to affiliate with either party is NOT someone who is going to be led around by the nose by ANY grou.
"Independents are at heart conservatives in outlook. The recent Gallup poll validated that data."
THIS you got right. But a one out of three average sucks.
No, that's not it. It wouldn't help if he did the same thing more slowly. It's what he's doing, not the speed at which it is being done.
Total Neo Isolationist wishful thinking without the slightest hint of factual merit.
Iraq did not even make the top 10 issues in the exit polls where people cited why they voted as they did in 2008. Your assumption is completely divorced from fact. It merely wishful thinking on your part
Also, your assumption that "independents" are thoughtful serious people is prove absurd by what they voted FOR in 2008. Anyone who bothered to be informed KNEW what 0 was. That they did NOT know it proves the point that they are sheep lead by the media, not thinkers.
So you managed to bat a complete zero.
Wrong on every single one of your statements. I cannot decide which is more amusing to watch, you arrogant unwarranted assumption of the infallibility of your emotion based dogmas, or the rabid ignorance of basic facts you demonstrate in your post.
Either way you post proves you are an absurdly ignorant arrogant clown.
Afghanistan. O ran as being FOR an expanded mission in Afghanistan.
That proves your ignorance on the 2008 elections results complete.
Once again you've written a brilliant post that's about a thousand times better than the article it's commenting on.
Your post is the best brief summation of the political mood of the independents in the most recent election.
How quickly Mr Brooks you forget the 2008 promises of your idol Dear Reader...
Is this a typo? Did you mean Dear Leader?
Or is this a reference to the teleprompter?
(Or, possibly, a comment on how Dear Leader might be pronounced, in English, in the Dear Leaderland of N Korea?)
The Terri Schiavo tragedy and intelligent design -- and how those matters were/are played by the dying media -- turned a lot of them away.
And now it's just starting to dimly dawn on some of them why you have to put principles first.
You don't actually really think that an anti-war Democrat or a once pro-war REPUBLICAN would admit voting for Obama (or against Bush)because of the war?? If you do, then you're more naive than I thought.
"Also, your assumption that "independents" are thoughtful serious people is prove absurd by what they voted FOR in 2008. Anyone who bothered to be informed KNEW what 0 was. That they did NOT know it proves the point that they are sheep lead by the media, not thinkers."
A LOT of people got fooled in the last election, Democrats, Republicans and Independents all, because the media abdicated completely their role as "vetters" of the candidates. That abdication was far worse and more one-sided than in any election I've seen in my fifty years of following politics. Can Independent voters be fooled?? To quote our next president "you betcha".
But the old quote goes "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me". As evidence that this is NOT the case for independents, I submit the following data----Virginia, New Jersey, and NY-23. I think those are more than sufficient to prove my case.
So, yes, I "do" still think that independent voters are more likely to think things through than either Democrats or Republicans.
They are also utterly irrelevant to the facts of the discussion at hand. I have presented you the facts, you have responded by shouting your feeling more shrilly.
That is both arrogant and ignorant. You bat yet another zero this round.
The world works as it does, no as you feel it should.
Me: The Republicn victories in Virginia, New Jersey, NY-23 (and elsewhere) were largely due to independents shifting their votes. The media has NOT changed their positions, but independents changed their votes. Therefore, Independents are NOT "sheep led around by the nose by the media".
This is called "logical reasoning" from facts. You should try it some time.
The facts are completely at odds with your emotional based feelings for the notion of being a political “independent”
The facts are complete at odds with your Neo isolationist political dogmas.
The world exists as it is, learn to live in it, rather then mindlessly cling to your emotion drive fantasy land.