Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)

9. They don't wish to start their own party. Most "independents" are strongly partisan.

Reply to still_one (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 28, 2016, 12:46 PM

Dec 2016

They just like being unaffiliated because they think it's more socially acceptable and suggests they're above partisanship. And some don't have the option where they live of being affiliated.

In reality, the vast majority of "independents" are more strongly partisan than party-affiliated voters of recent decades.

And a lot of young people (who constitute a very large bloc of the electorate right now) are especially inclined to register as non-affiliated. But many will register with a party by their late 20s.

I have no problem with open or semi-open primaries but caucuses need to go. Colorado's doing the right thing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

After Bernie Sanders Delegate Issue, Colorado Creates Open Primaries For Independent Voters [View all] portlander23 Dec 2016 OP

I don't want people who do not WANT TO BE CALLED PART OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY to choose the still_one Dec 2016 #1

Nor I Me. Dec 2016 #2

Thank you. It is just plain BS as you said. The fact that someone dislikes the Democratic party so still_one Dec 2016 #3

They don't wish to start their own party. Most "independents" are strongly partisan. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #9

Not to be rude, but that "social acceptable" characterization is BS. No one is obligated to tell still_one Dec 2016 #12

And yet that's what numerous surveys show. I posted about this here: Garrett78 Dec 2016 #13

I do. They may bring much needed insight and diversity. aikoaiko Dec 2016 #17

No thank you - Dems should decide what happens in the Democratic Party SharonClark Dec 2016 #4

I've never been a fan of open primaries....nt Wounded Bear Dec 2016 #5

IBT Ratfucking since their inception. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #6

Hillary Would Have Won A CO Primary otohara Dec 2016 #7

Yep. Undemocratic caucuses are the only reason the delegate count was even remotely close. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #8

I agree about open primaries. They all ought to be open. longship Dec 2016 #10

More people involved is a good thing portlander23 Dec 2016 #14

That's right. Open primaries everywhere is the only answer. longship Dec 2016 #15

Hate caucuses, not sure about open primaries. Bradical79 Dec 2016 #11

Fucking bullshit. liquid diamond Dec 2016 #16

Primaries should be closed. LiberalFighter Dec 2016 #18

I support getting rid of caucuses. Closed/open I can see both sides. DanTex Dec 2016 #19