The role of independents

Chapter 9 focuses on party alignment and the role they play in our democracy. There is no question that the American government is defined by the 2 party system, and that this has proved to be extremely polarizing. In my opinion, the role of independents in the US is really interesting. While there is always a candidate running for the presidency in each election, there has never been what we would describe as an “independent” president; the closest case is George Washington. So, then, why do independents matter, and what role do they play in our government? Surprisingly, the number of independents outnumbers both the democratic and republican followers. In 2014, 39% of registered voters identified as independents whereas only 32% were democrats and 23% as democrats. This trend continues to grow each election cycle; in 2004 the groups were split almost evenly in thirds.

One of the main reasons for the rise of independent voters is their frustration with the current two party system. In particular, millennials are the ones who are most likely to be independents. Young voters see it as an opportunity to take a stand on our polarizing system; they do not like either party so see no point in identifying with it. While we may not immediately recognize how important these independent voters are, their role is crucial in elections. One particular example of their strength was in the 2012 election. There were more registered republicans than democrats, so on paper Mitt Romney should have technically won. But, since most independents that year were partisan to the democratic party, Barack Obama still won.

Like we learned about earlier in the year, being an independent means only being able to vote in primaries in certain states. This means that they are excluded from part of the political process just because they do not identify with a specific party. Because of this, many independents have become frustrated. For example, in Arizona, more people identify as independents than republicans or democrats. Yet, they still cannot participate in primaries which has led to activism through grass roots movements for more rights at the polls. The primaries are paid for with taxpayer money, but some people paying are still not allowed to participate. In my opinion, it is somewhat ironic and surprising that independents cannot vote in political primaries. America was and still is founded on the basis of individual thought and electing a government for the people by the people. By restricting the rights of what is now a majority group in our country, we are doing a disservice to our citizens and government. People should not have to pick a party in order to have their voices heard.

Sources:

http://news.gallup.com/poll/188096/democratic-republican-identification-near-historical-lows.aspx

https://www.npr.org/2016/02/28/467961962/sick-of-political-parties-unaffiliated-voters-are-changing-politics

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/05/5-facts-about-americas-political-independents/

10 Responses to "The role of independents"

Helen Spiller says:

December 3, 2017 at 5:42 pm

I entirely agree with your post and was actually very unaware of the large amount of people that are actually independent and not registred with a particular party. I think that’s definitely a telling point that so many Americans do not feel a certain connection to a particular party and how much their frustration shows through their party alignment. However, I think that the important aspect here isn’t as much that Americans can’t vote in primaries because 21 states have open primaries, which is a fair amount. I think it is most important to look at why so many Americans do not feel represented in a party, especially the young people. I think it shows a pretty sad fact about our parties that almost half of Americans feel no real voice in those parties. If this problem is going to be fixed, there needs to be a change in politics to represent the people more. I hope that in the next election we have more party representatives that can speak to those independents and hopefully create a more united country than the divided one we have today. It is important that these mass numbers of independents find a voice in our government, and like you said, are able to express that in any and all elections.
Lilly Alemayehu says:

December 3, 2017 at 9:36 pm

I think independents are a really interesting and unique part of our American society. The independents have been influential in some political outcomes and some independent candidates have been successful in attaining elected positions. But, the impact of independents has been impeded by the structure of our two-party system. For example, in the presidential elections, independent candidates are rarely allowed to participate in presidential debates. Independents are really only able to have influence in popular elections by taking votes away from major political party candidates. Also, in terms of elections, independents have failed to obtain significant or consistent representation in the national government, limiting their reach.
Stephanie Hughes says:

December 4, 2017 at 12:31 am

I had no idea that Independents made up that large of a percentage – this gives me hope that we can someday move away from our restrictive two-party system. In the 2016 election, 3rd party voters were given large amounts of backlash from Democrats in particular. I found this backlash to be abhorrent given the fact that every citizen has the right to vote for a candidate that best represents their needs and political preferences. People should not be shamed for expressing their desires via the vote. If the mentality that a vote for the Libertarian party hinders the ability of a D or R candidate continues, then we will never make progress as a nation to rid ourselves of the system that prevents progress in policymaking.
Jackson Krase says:

December 4, 2017 at 2:54 pm

As data suggests that the younger American population is less likely to be associated with a certain political party compared to older populations, your blog post does a great job in highlighting just how important independents are in our political process. With political dysfunction becoming commonplace in Washington, I personally am not surprised by this movement towards party affiliation. However, even though I understand the importance of independents within our democracy, I did not truly appreciate the quantitative magnitude of the group. Because independents make up such a significant portion of the American electorate, the need for election reform initiatives targeted at allowing independent to vote in could not primaries is increasing.
While I do recognize the importance and significance of the independent party and it’s members votes, I believe that the media often times overplays the group’s ability to determine elections. Take for example Barack Obama, who, in 2012, won a second term over Mitt Romney. A large factor that leed Obama back into the Oval Office was that he won most of the swing states up for grabs. However, Obama only received the highest independent vote in the battleground state of North Carolina; the sole swing state he lost to Romney. Data from FiveThirtyEight counters the idea that independents help carry a candidate to victory by showing that since 1976, the last four elections decided by less than 5 points were won by the candidate who lost the independent vote. Thus, the candidate who secured the most independent votes always ended up losing the national popular vote.In addition, political analyst Amy Walter’s points out that “independents usually lean towards one party or the other, even as they claim a nonpartisan label,” and that “true independents only make up about 10 percent of all voters.” Thus, as many of those who identify as independent are not actually truly moderate in political ideology, the role of independents should be taken seriously within the political system but should but not overrated and labeled as election changing votes.
Allison McLaughlin says:

December 4, 2017 at 11:28 pm

I think you made a really interesting and important argument regarding the independent party. We tend to automatically believe that the United States inherently has the perfect type of government, but I think the extremely strong existence of the independent party proves that our system of government definitely has its flaws. Our Congressional voting system, the plurality, system tends to create and/or strengthen a 2-party system, which is what we have. The 2-party system inherently excludes smaller parties and minority votes, as those groups do not have nearly as much campaigning power as the top two powerful national parties. Systems with proportional representation systems and multi-party systems have been found to have better minority representation, a much higher representation of women in legislatures, and a much higher voter turnout. When there are only two parties as major contenders in elections, people are less likely to vote or be happy with the outcome as they feel their opinions and views are not being accurately represented by the candidates. This is especially true in modern society, where a new political identity is becoming more and more prevalent in millennials: being socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Further, you mentioned how the strong presence of the independent party had a huge impact on Obama’s win in 2012. I would argue that the independent party also largely contributed to the 2016 election, as the percentage of independent voters remained extremely high. For example, in Michigan, if Hillary had gotten just slightly more of the independent vote, she would have won the state. Those independent votes are not able to elect their own candidate, but can be extremely detrimental to the accurate representation of the outcome of elections.

http://www.fairvote.org/pr_vs_single_member_districts_in_states
Yanbin Zhang says:

December 5, 2017 at 12:58 am

The perspective to look at the independent voters is really contructive in our time. The amount of self-defined independent peopleThe perspective to look at the independent voters is really constructive in our time. The amount of self-defined independent people is gradually growing in this politically polarized country. Although the president is still elected from two candidates of two parties, the 39% independent voters of all registered voters would, with no doubts, pose huge influence on the result of election. Yet someone may argue that this group of people doesn’t matter as much as they look like. Most of the independent voters, even if they are not predetermined on which party they would vote for, but they would be a “ close partisans”, rather than full independent voters. Only 10% of the so-called independent voters would really behave as swing voters, and the other would still vote for the party they close to before the election. However, I still believe that the number of real independent voters is increasing and so their influence is. A survey by the WSJ shows that nearly 20% of voters weren’t supporting either major-party candidate at June in 2016 — the highest levels in the past three election cycles at the same period. And 47% of voters would consider to vote for a third party, compared with 38% in 2008. Even if there is still no any third party strong enough to compete with current two parties. But it is proved that people are less satisfied by both of the two parties than ever before. I think this trend of public opinion could significantly influence how both party consider to elect their nominee for president and adopt policy thinking more attractive to the independent voters.
Esteban Lara says:

December 5, 2017 at 7:37 pm

This is an interesting topic and really made me reshape my view on independent voters in the United States. I also never really thought of this group as having a significant effect on the elections of the country but their flexibility and lack of “loyalty” to any particular party does open the possibility of them influencing the outcome of an election. I guess the reason some states don’t allow independents to vote in primaries is because they believe independents have no reason to do so (as a result of their lack of loyalty to either party) and might not want them to interfere in the election of the party’s nominee. But you’re correct, everyone pays taxes that go into these elections and as a result of that they should be allowed to have a say in these matters. Furthermore, it would be interesting to introduce the vote of people who have a different perspective on a particular party (such as independents do).
Marcin Jerzewski says:

December 6, 2017 at 1:25 pm

In my opinion, one of the biggest peculiarities of the American political system is the existence (and very pronounced importance!) of primaries. Your blog post was a very interesting read to me, as it does a great job explaining different consequences of the domination of two parties in U.S. politics. As you rightly mention, in many states this dominance deprives independent voters of the opportunity to have a full stake in choosing their representatives. What I find particularly peculiar is that the process of the primaries has never been specified in the United States Constitution; political parties have developed their own procedures over time. Because of the timing of the primaries, residents of some states are also deprived of the opportunity to have a say in who the presidential candidate will be. I think that these two issues combined – the importance of the timing of the primaries, and, as discussed in your blog post, the fact that independents cannot participate in closed primaries in as many as thirteen states – undermine the functioning of American democracy.
Stella Von Spreckelsen says:

December 6, 2017 at 2:10 pm

You bring up a very interesting point for the political climate of America. Especially in the last election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the two party system we have currently has become so polarized that people start to lose sight of actual politics. This has a haunting effect on our government because so many people choose to focus on strict partisan issues and don’t care to understand or learn about world issues/foreign policy that affects everyone. Independents, as you’ve stated play a huge part in our politics now because they separate themselves from the polarized climate of the elections. Independents also show that it is important to research issues and policies in America without any partisan bias. However, it is bad that they are only allowed to participate in some elections because this limits political freedom and our country loves to preach that we are so democratic and that everyone has a say in politics. By keeping independents out of some elections, this is adding to issues of our two party system and making it harder for an independent candidate to ever win. Independents have to ability to shake the elections as you mentioned with the 2012 election where Obama won over Romney even though it was expected for the republican nominee to win because there were technically more registered republicans. The whole idea over having to register for a specific party to even vote is bad also because it forces people to choose sides without taking into consideration the candidates values without their party affiliation. I agree with you that independents are making a break through in the political climate of America and I can see why so many millennials would prefer to identify with them instead of our main two political parties.
Kevin Todd says:

December 6, 2017 at 7:49 pm

You make interesting points regarding US voters. I agree with you that a person should not have to identify with a political party to have their voices heard. Everyone should have the equal ability to vote despite what their views are based on how this country was built. It is sad that we do not ever see an independent candidate be elected due to the republican or democratic parties stealing their ideas and presenting them in the ways the public wants. We most likely will not ever see a third party in the US because democrats and republicans do not have any incentive to break off from their parties. Duverger’s law contributes to the growing of the two major political parties we have as parties combine with smaller ones to get ultimately the greater amount of people supporting one party compared to the other. I agree that it is unfair for those who pay taxes do not get the chance to vote in certain primaries if they registered independent. Then again partially they cannot complain because they chose to register independent. They had the chance to side with one party and did not so it comes full circle in that it is the person’s own fault rather than blaming the system.

Comments are closed.