Jonah Goldberg, a noted conservative commentator and author, has this op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News, rebutting the idea that independent voters are essentially moderates. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.
Jonah Goldberg, a noted conservative commentator and author, has this op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News, rebutting the idea that independent voters are essentially moderates. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.
(((Jonah Goldberg)))
Of course most of them are not actual centrists. They just don’t openly affiliate with a party because they are trying to avoid being on a purge list.
The Mises Caucus of the Libertarian Party = the insurgents of the Democratic Party (Sanders supporters) and Republican Party (Trump supporters.) I assume there is a similar dynamic in the Green Party, which is why it turned ‘eco-socialist’ and left moderate liberal Greens on the outs.
I mean, really, the Democrats are centrists. #fify Jonah
@Jim I am one of those ecosocialists who became a Green for far more than environmental reasons. And, there is no “purge list.” Alaska Greens were booted for violating a basic party rule. Rhode Island Greens withdrew rather than face deaccreditation for similar reasons.
My ‘purge list’ comment wasn’t directed at the Green Party or any other party. It was a tongue in cheek reference to Demo Rep’s non-stop ranting about voter registrations being purge lists. In other words, Goldberg is right that many independent voters really are partisan. They just don’t want to formally affiliate with a party because, as Demo Rep says, then they might get purged.
No, it’s because people like to think of themselves as original, independent thinkers. And maybe they do have some differences with both major parties. But in the end, there’s one they usually fear and hate more than the other, and that makes them effectively partisans of the one they dislike less.
Were it not for the coercion of ballot access censorship laws it would be easy for voters to form parties with a coherent set of policy positions. Instead ballot access drives citizens to be non-voting “independents” or de facto members of the duopoly parties. Libertarians are not incoherent independent, they are anti-duopoly partisans with a coherent ideology. Libertarians without access to the censored ballot are not independents, they are banned partisans.
Disclosure: I am a co-founder of the Libertarian Party.
Folks NOT joining a party may now get purged —
as in olde Hitler nazi or Stalin commie regimes.
IE get purged if you join or not join.
—-
NOOO public party lists.
EQUAL candidate nom pets – secret – as in secret ballots.
Nonsense. Folks not joining a party are on the upswing, quickly growing towards a majority, and in some states already are. And that’s before you get to all the nonvoters and all the states that register everyone nonpartisan. In fact if you add up all the voters registered with all the parties in the country, they’re what, a fifth or a quarter of the U.S. population? Good luck purging the majority of the country.
SEE ACTUAL PURGE OF COMMIES AND NON-NAZIS IN 1933 HITLER GERMANY AFTER THE INFAMOUS *ENABLING ACT* WAS PASSED.
LATER PURGE OF OLDE NAZIS IN JUNE-JULY 1934.
JUST ENOUGH NEW POLITICAL MORONS EVERY DAY.
Non Nazis were not purged. The vast majority of German citizens were never Nazi party members.
Communists and active anti Nazis were purged. That isn’t nearly the same thing. The vast majority of the country were not active Nazis or anti Nazis. They simply went about their daily lives and saluted when required. Before the rise of the Nazis and after their fall they were by and large ok with switching sides, to the extent that they had to take sides at all. Most people in the USSR and other communist countries were never communist party members and of course active anticommunism was persecuted, but the same rules applied once communism fell.
D Frank Robinson, it’s true that ballot access laws curtail the formation and development of smaller parties. However, even if they didn’t, I don’t believe most independent voters have an interest in joining any party, actual or would be. Rather, they like to think if themselves as independent thinkers and voters. Yes, I agree there are some who would join new or existing smaller parties if laws were different, but I don’t think most would.
How many 1919-1933 nazis were purged by Hitler SS in 1934 ???
ie the moron folks who got Hitler into POWER in Jan 1933.
Similar to the olde commie 1917 Bolsheviks killed off by Stalin in 1936-1939.
That is correct, both Nazis and communists carried out purges of dissenting factions within the party after taking power. The safest thing to be under Nazi or communist rule was neither a member of nor an active opponent of the ruling party.
The safest thing was to be a collaborator like George Soros.
https://rufusredd.wordpress.com/2021/03/14/soros-the-collaborator/
What happened to lots of those *safest thing* folks in 1941-1945 ???
— mass murder on both sides — nazis vs commies.
It was not safe to be a collaborator. They faced the danger of falling out of favor with those in power as well as being discovered and killed by their own people that they were betraying.
Demo rep is right. No one was very safe under totalitarian regimes, especially in war. Safest is a relative term.
Often fatal to be a collaborator — esp in invaded/occupied areas
– esp with string partisan forces – France, Yugoslavia, etc. in WW II.
All sorts of war/post-war purges – domestic and allied military govts
— Norway quislings, etc.
——–
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
typo — strong partisan forces