PDA

View Full Version : Voters leaving Republican & Democratic parties in droves



pwaldo
12-23-2011, 09:44 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-22/voters-political-parties/52171688/1?loc=interstitialskip


More than 2.5 million voters have left the Democratic and Republican parties since the 2008 elections, while the number of independent voters continues to grow.

A USA TODAY analysis of state voter registration statistics shows registered Democrats declined in 25 of the 28 states that register voters by party. Republicans dipped in 21 states, while independents increased in 18 states.

The trend is acute in states that are key to next year's presidential race. In the eight swing states that register voters by party, Democrats' registration is down by 800,000 and Republicans' by 350,000. Independents have gained 325,000.

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 12:32 AM
that's a very bad sign for the dems

freethrowtommy
12-24-2011, 10:40 AM
that's a very bad sign for the dems

Why? The only thing that registration does is allow you to vote in closed primaries. Being registered means nothing for the main election. If I were in a closed primary state, I could register Republican for primary voting and then vote straight ticket for the Democrats in the main election (not that I would, just an example).

Why not jump ship and register Republican or Independent to vote in their primaries?

Being registered means just about nothing...

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 11:33 AM
Why? The only thing that registration does is allow you to vote in closed primaries. Being registered means nothing for the main election. If I were in a closed primary state, I could register Republican for primary voting and then vote straight ticket for the Democrats in the main election (not that I would, just an example).

Why not jump ship and register Republican or Independent to vote in their primaries?

Being registered means just about nothing...

Regardless of all that, it clearly shows a trend in political thinking and thus voting tendencies.

freethrowtommy
12-24-2011, 06:51 PM
Regardless of all that, it clearly shows a trend in political thinking and thus voting tendencies.

Not really... and I already explained why.

If Wisconsin weren't an open primary, I would register Republican to vote in their primaries this year... like hell I would vote for any of them in the main elections (although, a case could be made for Ron Paul).

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 07:07 PM
is that because obama has done such a great job? you really want four more years of him? you may not like the republican candidates, but you dont really know what you're going to get with them. you know what obama's agenda is, and i don't see how you could support it rationally.

gladdyontherise
12-24-2011, 07:57 PM
is that because obama has done such a great job? you really want four more years of him? you may not like the republican candidates, but you dont really know what you're going to get with them. you know what obama's agenda is, and i don't see how you could support it rationally.

Change for the sake of change isn't very rational either, right?

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 08:03 PM
Change for the sake of change isn't very rational either, right?

Which is exactly how we got Obama. Voting republican is not a change for the sake of change. Obama has a proven track record that is disastrous for our country from both an economic and a foreign policy perspective. ANY of the republican candidates would be better than Obama.

gladdyontherise
12-24-2011, 08:07 PM
Which is exactly how we got Obama. Voting republican is not a change for the sake of change. Obama has a proven track record that is disastrous for our country from both an economic and a foreign policy perspective. ANY of the republican candidates would be better than Obama.

Notice the pattern? If a republican wins the election and does a terrible job in office what's the excuse? The whole "It's not his fault that the person before him ruined everything" line gets old, and both sides do it.

The person who gets elected should be voted in because a person think's he's the best possible choice. Not because it's someone different.

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 08:11 PM
Notice the pattern? If a republican wins the election and does a terrible job in office what's the excuse? The whole "It's not his fault that the person before him ruined everything" line gets old, and both sides do it.

The person who gets elected should be voted in because a person think's he's the best possible choice. Not because it's someone different.

I just said all of the rep candidates are better choices that obama. Thus, the best possible choice will be one of the reps, regardless of who it is. Obama is the worst possible choice.

This is not the same as saying vote for someone just because they are not obama. Each of them are fiscal conservatives. Obama is a spending machine. Each of them (except Ron Paul) are strong on foreign policy. Obama is a foreign policy nightmare. You can vote for any of them based on their resumes, and they are all more qualified than Obama.

gladdyontherise
12-24-2011, 08:16 PM
I just said all of the rep candidates are better choices that obama. Thus, the best possible choice will be one of the reps, regardless of who it is. Obama is the worst possible choice.

This is not the same as saying vote for someone just because they are not obama. Each of them are fiscal conservatives. Obama is a spending machine. Each of them (except Ron Paul) are strong on foreign policy. Obama is a foreign policy nightmare. You can vote for any of them based on their resumes, and they are all more qualified than Obama.

It kind of is voting for someone because they aren't Obama though.

I will decide who i'm voting for when I see who is running and who I think can do the best job. I have the strong feeling most conservatives will vote for whoever is the Republican canidate and it won't matter to them who it is. (Granted Democrats will probably do this with Obama, but not nearly to the extent of the other side).

Obama isn't doing a good job, but I personally refuse to ignore him on my ballot because of that. If he's the best person for the job, I'll vote for him. It's a shame most people aren't like that.

AUTaxMan
12-24-2011, 08:22 PM
It kind of is voting for someone because they aren't Obama though.

I will decide who i'm voting for when I see who is running and who I think can do the best job. I have the strong feeling most conservatives will vote for whoever is the Republican canidate and it won't matter to them who it is. (Granted Democrats will probably do this with Obama, but not nearly to the extent of the other side).

Obama isn't doing a good job, but I personally refuse to ignore him on my ballot because of that. If he's the best person for the job, I'll vote for him. It's a shame most people aren't like that.

Obama has a well-documented track record for being an absolutely terrible president...without a doubt the worst since Carter. Do you not understand this? Based on his potential competition, how could he possibly be the best person for the job? If you evaluate him head-to-head with each of the rep candidates, he is worse than all of them.

freethrowtommy
12-25-2011, 12:14 AM
I just said all of the rep candidates are better choices that obama. Thus, the best possible choice will be one of the reps, regardless of who it is. Obama is the worst possible choice.

This is not the same as saying vote for someone just because they are not obama. Each of them are fiscal conservatives. Obama is a spending machine. Each of them (except Ron Paul) are strong on foreign policy. Obama is a foreign policy nightmare. You can vote for any of them based on their resumes, and they are all more qualified than Obama.

You do understand that Obama can only do so much, right? Congress pulls the strings and writes the bills that come across his desk. Right now, there is nothing getting done because Congress isn't getting anything to him or can't agree on what to do. We have a group right now who would rather screw the President than get anything done. You can only stand up and say "get this done" so many times.

And, you do realize that Congress holds the purse strings, right? They approve or disapprove the budget for any given year. It isn't like Obama can just spend money without approval from them.

I am pretty sure you are giving one man way too much credit for a problem that stems from more than just him. I am not a huge Obama fan, but the way discussions go around here, you would think he is the worst President in the history of the United States.

You guys should be thrilled to have him as President... he compromises more than anyone thought he would. And saying that anyone in that joke you call a Republican primary race is better than Obama is just one big laugh out loud from me. They might as well just give Obama the Presidency back.

AUTaxMan
12-25-2011, 05:28 PM
You do understand that Obama can only do so much, right? Congress pulls the strings and writes the bills that come across his desk. Right now, there is nothing getting done because Congress isn't getting anything to him or can't agree on what to do. We have a group right now who would rather screw the President than get anything done. You can only stand up and say "get this done" so many times.

And, you do realize that Congress holds the purse strings, right? They approve or disapprove the budget for any given year. It isn't like Obama can just spend money without approval from them.

I am pretty sure you are giving one man way too much credit for a problem that stems from more than just him. I am not a huge Obama fan, but the way discussions go around here, you would think he is the worst President in the history of the United States.

You guys should be thrilled to have him as President... he compromises more than anyone thought he would. And saying that anyone in that joke you call a Republican primary race is better than Obama is just one big laugh out loud from me. They might as well just give Obama the Presidency back.

You do understand the regulatory burdens that Obama has placed on this country, right? That his czars (who he appointed without Congressional approval) put them in place with no checks and balances, right? You understand that he has declared a war on domestic energy production, right?

Obama has to propose a budget before Congress can approve one. When's the last time he did that?

Also, the Congressional Dems follow his lead in lock step. They do his bidding. The only check is the republican majority in the house. You understand that the republicans aren't just going to do what he tells them to do, right? And that refusing to do what he says is not obstructionism, right?

You complain about Congress, but what good has Obama done since he's been in office? Thank God we have the republicans from preventing him from running this country into the ground, because if he could, he'd raise the hell out of taxes, put the oil companies out of business, give even more power to unions, and do what he said he was going to do-fundamentally change this country.

freethrowtommy
12-26-2011, 11:54 AM
You do understand the regulatory burdens that Obama has placed on this country, right? That his czars (who he appointed without Congressional approval) put them in place with no checks and balances, right? You understand that he has declared a war on domestic energy production, right?

Obama has to propose a budget before Congress can approve one. When's the last time he did that?

Also, the Congressional Dems follow his lead in lock step. They do his bidding. The only check is the republican majority in the house. You understand that the republicans aren't just going to do what he tells them to do, right? And that refusing to do what he says is not obstructionism, right?

You complain about Congress, but what good has Obama done since he's been in office? Thank God we have the republicans from preventing him from running this country into the ground, because if he could, he'd raise the hell out of taxes, put the oil companies out of business, give even more power to unions, and do what he said he was going to do-fundamentally change this country.

They do? Last time I checked, there were the so called "Blue Dog" Democrats who opposed much of what he was trying to do with the healthcare bill and he had a hell of a time trying to get their votes. The Democrats are far from a group in lock step and many of them don't vote along party lines... pretty sure you have this mixed up.

You guys spit so many talking points from the Republican list, I don't even want to debate this with you. Think for yourselves a bit, won't you?

tutall
12-26-2011, 12:01 PM
They do? Last time I checked, there were the so called "Blue Dog" Democrats who opposed much of what he was trying to do with the healthcare bill and he had a hell of a time trying to get their votes. The Democrats are far from a group in lock step and many of them don't vote along party lines... pretty sure you have this mixed up.

You guys spit so many talking points from the Republican list, I don't even want to debate this with you. Think for yourselves a bit, won't you?

Two questions for you....

1. What has Obama done while in government that you agree with that would make him right for another term?

2. What key bills did the "blue dogs" help squash while the dems had complete control of congress, senate, and presidency?

ensbergcollector
12-26-2011, 12:01 PM
It kind of is voting for someone because they aren't Obama though.

I will decide who i'm voting for when I see who is running and who I think can do the best job. I have the strong feeling most conservatives will vote for whoever is the Republican canidate and it won't matter to them who it is. (Granted Democrats will probably do this with Obama, but not nearly to the extent of the other side).

Obama isn't doing a good job, but I personally refuse to ignore him on my ballot because of that. If he's the best person for the job, I'll vote for him. It's a shame most people aren't like that.

really? you do know that obama won the election running on the "anyone but bush"..ahem, i mean "change" platform right?

yes, i know bush wasn't running, which is what made obama's campaign so absurd.

AUTaxMan
12-26-2011, 12:18 PM
Two questions for you....

1. What has Obama done while in government that you agree with that would make him right for another term?

2. What key bills did the "blue dogs" help squash while the dems had complete control of congress, senate, and presidency?

These questions will not be answered.

gladdyontherise
12-26-2011, 12:24 PM
really? you do know that obama won the election running on the "anyone but bush"..ahem, i mean "change" platform right?

yes, i know bush wasn't running, which is what made obama's campaign so absurd.

I was talking about this next election. I'm probably different from most in that I will not vote based on which party I consider myself (and I am more liberal), but I will vote based on who I think is the best person for the job.

freethrowtommy
12-26-2011, 08:43 PM
These questions will not be answered.

Yes they will. Sorry I am not on the forums 24/7...

freethrowtommy
12-26-2011, 08:48 PM
Two questions for you....

1. What has Obama done while in government that you agree with that would make him right for another term?

2. What key bills did the "blue dogs" help squash while the dems had complete control of congress, senate, and presidency?

1. Passed the Healthcare bill... I know many consider that to be a negative, but with a sick father, it has been nothing but a positive. My mother is also the administrator of a home health agency so she has been on the inside for many many years. There is a lot to like about this bill... but I wish it would have gone further.

I also like repealing DADT. McCain would have done neither of these things.

2. And the blue dogs were the cause of many revisions to the health care bill that got some of the further reaching good stuff taken out. Obstructing the bill causes revisions and while it didn't kill the bill, it took some stuff out. They didn't have enough to pass the bill without the blue dogs votes.

AUTaxMan
12-26-2011, 09:38 PM
1. Passed the Healthcare bill... I know many consider that to be a negative, but with a sick father, it has been nothing but a positive. My mother is also the administrator of a home health agency so she has been on the inside for many many years. There is a lot to like about this bill... but I wish it would have gone further.

I also like repealing DADT. McCain would have done neither of these things.

2. And the blue dogs were the cause of many revisions to the health care bill that got some of the further reaching good stuff taken out. Obstructing the bill causes revisions and while it didn't kill the bill, it took some stuff out. They didn't have enough to pass the bill without the blue dogs votes.

Explain what you mean by "further reaching good stuff."

mrveggieman
12-27-2011, 09:42 AM
really? you do know that obama won the election running on the "anyone but bush"..ahem, i mean "change" platform right?

yes, i know bush wasn't running, which is what made obama's campaign so absurd.


So tell me agian how is that any different from the republicans and their anything but Obama campaign? :rolleyes:

Star_Cards
12-27-2011, 01:27 PM
I think this is a good trend. Maybe people will vote on a candidate to candidate basis rather than just throwing all votes decided by what party they are affiliated with.

Star_Cards
12-27-2011, 01:32 PM
You do understand that Obama can only do so much, right? Congress pulls the strings and writes the bills that come across his desk. Right now, there is nothing getting done because Congress isn't getting anything to him or can't agree on what to do. We have a group right now who would rather screw the President than get anything done. You can only stand up and say "get this done" so many times.

And, you do realize that Congress holds the purse strings, right? They approve or disapprove the budget for any given year. It isn't like Obama can just spend money without approval from them.

I am pretty sure you are giving one man way too much credit for a problem that stems from more than just him. I am not a huge Obama fan, but the way discussions go around here, you would think he is the worst President in the history of the United States.

You guys should be thrilled to have him as President... he compromises more than anyone thought he would. And saying that anyone in that joke you call a Republican primary race is better than Obama is just one big laugh out loud from me. They might as well just give Obama the Presidency back.

very well said. It's hard for me to take anyone seriously if they say "anyone" in the republican primary would be better than Obama. There are some terrible choices still out there running for the nomination.