Topic: Independents on the rise | |
---|---|
GOP Party Identification Slips Nationwide and in Pennsylvania No Indication of Further Democratic Gains April 29, 2009 PrintEmailShare From: To: Over the first four months of 2009, the Republican Party has continued to lose adherents. Interviews with over 7,000 respondents nationwide so far this year found fewer than a quarter (23%) of the combined total identifying themselves as Republicans. This is down from 25% in 2008, and from 30% in 2004. In total, the GOP has lost roughly a quarter of its base over the past five years. But these Republican losses have not translated into substantial Democratic gains. So far in 2009, 35% of adults nationwide identify as Democrats, about the same as in 2008 (36%). While GOP identification has fallen seven points since 2004, the Democrats have gained only two points over that period. Instead, a growing number of Americans describe themselves as independents, 36% in 2009 compared with just 32% in 2008 and 30% in 2004. ![]() Looking at the individual monthly surveys since December suggests that both political parties are facing declining membership in the wake of an engaging election cycle. In the Pew Research Center's April 2009 survey, 33% identified as Democrats, down from 39% in December 2008. Over the same period, the share calling themselves Republicans has fallen from 26% to 22%. By contrast, the number of independents has risen from 30% in December to 39% now. While it is not unusual for Republican and Democratic identification to grow over the course of an election and subside afterward, the magnitude of these changes is noteworthy. . . . http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1207/republican-party-identification-slips-nationwide-pennsylvania-specter-switch Is this a growing dissatisfaction with the major parties? Could this be the beginning of the rise of a third party? |
|
|
|
it looks that way to me. I'm glad...i'm getting tired of the right wing vs left wing blame games
|
|
|
|
it looks that way to me. I'm glad...i'm getting tired of the right wing vs left wing blame games Here here to that. |
|
|
|
it looks that way to me. I'm glad...i'm getting tired of the right wing vs left wing blame games Now it's gonna be a threesome or a foursome. ![]() |
|
|
|
I am unaffiliated so I don't know if that counts as independent.
|
|
|
|
it looks that way to me. I'm glad...i'm getting tired of the right wing vs left wing blame games Now it's gonna be a threesome or a foursome. ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
Independents are awesome. All the news media talks about us saying "OMG! We don't know how they will vote! ahhhhhhhhhh!"
![]() |
|
|
|
We need a strong third party. Two parties doesn't work well. On any given issue it seems that 90% of time the congressional voting goes down party lines, but only in stubborn opposition of the other side. Does anyone vote their conscience anymore? A third party could make voting along party less effective and maybe make it easier to vote one's conscience. That's my thinking anyway.
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Atlantis75
on
Sun 05/03/09 09:58 PM
|
|
We need a strong third party. Two parties doesn't work well. On any given issue it seems that 90% of time the congressional voting goes down party lines, but only in stubborn opposition of the other side. Does anyone vote their conscience anymore? A third party could make voting along party less effective and maybe make it easier to vote one's conscience. That's my thinking anyway. If you go to Europe, it's not uncommon to have 6-7 parties, or even more. From the way of looking of what is more democratic...that's a hell a lot more options to choose from. Essentially, all competing parties have to reach a certain percentage to have a seat in the parliament (treat it like congress) so there might be more diverse as voting and policy making works, and some parties can merge and form coalitions. |
|
|
|
it looks that way to me. I'm glad...i'm getting tired of the right wing vs left wing blame games Now it's gonna be a threesome or a foursome. ![]() ![]() ![]() Are you sure you're rose? |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() maybe if there were more parties then it would give the others a run for their money |
|
|
|
I am unaffiliated so I don't know if that counts as independent. By the way they seem to be making the calculation yes. Using that definition explains why we still have trouble getting anything but a republican or a democrat elected. There's simply nothing cohesive about the group to get them to vote in mass. The numbers are still probably off because there are so many voters like me in so many states like CA that are registered either republican or democrat simply so they can vote in the primary and not because they share ideology with that party. |
|
|