“Independents” (and Primaries)
Jan 5th, 2008 by Micah Tillman | 3 Comments |
(When you put something in quotes, it makes it seem controversial.)
I just read the following on RasmussenReports.com:
Independents are still more likely to participate in the Democratic Primary.
Which should make one suspicious of the tendency to equate “independent” with “centrist” or “moderate.”
And it also should make one question the system of primaries as they are now (as I’ve written about here). While only one part of the problem, it seems obvious to me that people who aren’t members of a group (club, church, business, organization, etc.) shouldn’t be voting in that group’s internal issues (which selecting a candidate to represent that group is).
Does that mean you think I should not register as a Republican so I can vote for Ron Paul? I am currently an independent. Or is it okay because for that period of time, until I reregister as an independent, I will officially be a member of that group?
So long as you’re actually a member of a group, your motivation for being a member thereof doesn’t really matter to me :-) If they want to let you in, and then let you back out, that’s up to them.
While I agree with your overall point about allowing independants to vote in party primaries, I have to pick at your reporting, noted media critic that I am ;-)
Read in the context of the article, I’m pretty sure that line is saying that current polling numbers in New Hampshire indicate that independants are more likely to vote in this upcoming primary, rather than to indicate some historical trend. Centrists/moderates trending more towards the Democrats in this primary doesn’t make them not centrists/moderates.