Independent moderates view bumper stickers, laugh, then shake their heads.
Independent moderates see the best and the worst of the two parties at the same time.
Independent moderates view the political landscape as a football field, thus never let the ball cross either 30 yard line.
Independent moderates know all media is naturally biased, thus pick their preferred network on other factors.
Independent moderates honestly criticize or praise both sides.
Independent moderates have a better understanding of issues and positions because they study and don’t automatically side with a partisan party.
Independent moderates don’t jump on a party bandwagon because they don’t trust where the wagon is going.
Independent moderates don’t like nick-picky bickering, campaign BS, nonanswers to questions, and lack of specifics.
Independent moderates not provoke fear if candidate X in party Y is elected.
Independent moderates balance government programs with fiscal responsibility.
Independent moderates listen and reflect.
Independent moderates see through campaign BS.
Independent moderates are the ones who change the direction of the political pendulum.
Independent moderates listen to new ideas (such as President Bush’s social security reform) but also ask the tough questions about financing the transition from one system to the next (a subject the Bush administration did not address).
Independent moderates have a clear, grounded view that is a response of the far left’s heads-in-the-clouds view and the far right’s head-up-their-butt view. (Or visa versa.)
Independent moderates prefer a Supreme Court balanced with different legal ideologies rather than a court dominated by one.
Independent moderates do not vote based on red or blue, gender, race, or a single issue.
Independent moderates disapprove of negative campaign ads by either party, and despise special interest ads.
Independent moderates know legislation dealing with morality, patriotism, civic responsibility, and faith-based issues are doomed for failure.
Independents trust our country’s election outcomes more than party partisans.
Independent moderates long for campaigns based on issues.
Independent moderates favor people-driven, country-first solutions over party interests.
Independent moderates want the victor to be successful – no matter how they voted.
A Frank Angle 
Pingback: What is a Independent Moderate ? |
Pingback: On Opinions in the Shorts: Vol. 27 « A Frank Angle
Pingback: Deciphering the Mind of a Moderate Independent « The Anonymous Moderate's Blog
You counldn’t have said it any better.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Sherel,
Thanks for the kind words, for stopping by, and for commenting. I wrote that before the 2008 election, and it sure seems to be still current.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on A Frank Angle and commented:
The political season in the U.S. creates a lot of discussion. For me, as Democrats claim I’m a Republican, and the Republicans call me a Democrat, I smile – after all, I’m an independent moderate.
This post originally appeared here on Sept 22, 2008 when this blog was less than a month old – and it tells who I am politically – and it is applicable for in other countries as well. Feel free to comment either here or on the original post.
LikeLike
Independent moderates also realize that Wall Street controls both political parties. Today Obama is criticizing Romney for working at the Bain hedge fund when President Obama tonight eats dinner at a fund raiser set up by Black Rock a big Wall Street firm.
Good post.
You know what they find in the middle of the road–road kill. You know what happens to the guy sitting on the fence–you get pricked by the barbed wire. I know your feeling, and it is sad and hurts because we want a Great America with a beam of light of freedom and liberty for all.
LikeLike
Randel,
Good point about the financial sector. Love the road kill analogy – especially in light of the political center on Capitol Hill is just about gone. Thanks for commenting and sharing!
LikeLike
It is unfortunate that politics has become a profession in most democratic countries, and that getting elected takes a lot of money. The only encouragement I get, is by comparing our democratic country to the majority of non democratic countries in the world. Then, I can smile, and be happy that I have such good fortune. But when I examine the workings of politics within my own country, I feel a lot of disappointment, and it is hard to get enthusiastic about parties and even candidates. I’ve been disappointed so many times.
LikeLike
Shimon,
Thanks for sharing that this post also relates to Israeli politics. I also think about the democratic system being better than nondemocratic, after all, perspective is a matter of “as compared to what?”. Thanks for visiting and commenting.
LikeLike
To be honest I don’t know what party I support anymore…why can’t the two parties work together. I know since the formation of parties under Adams and Jefferson fighting and name-calling have been the norm. But they seem to be taking it to new extremes these days. Or maybe I think so since I am living with their policies or lack of policies.
LikeLike
TBM,
Although a bridge between the two parties exists among voters, it is almost gone within those elected … thus leaving “it’s our way or the highway” approach. Therefore, voters should not doubt themselves … but it leaves voters to probably cast a vote against someone, as opposed to voting for them – which leads to election to misread the results, and then overreach. Thanks for commenting.
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree more! Thanks for reposting this.
LikeLike
Twixt,
Cheers to you for that! Thanks for visiting.
LikeLike
That’s Great! I love that Independant Moderate! :+)
LikeLike
Starla,
Glad you enjoyed this … and thanks for visiting.
LikeLike
Interesting post. I’ve always been political, but non party political. And I always thought I was right wing, until I took this test http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
Not sure how much weight I’d put on the result but if you have a couple of minutes it’s interesting to do.
You say this post was originally written before the 2008 election, when the majority of people voted for “change”. So what’s “changed”? I think I’m with Emma Goldman on the answer to this, “If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.”
LikeLike
Fascab,
I will visit the link … so thanks for it.
“Change” in politics is so overused, bottom line it means changing the party in power! Looking back at 2008, I think President Obama’s idea of change was getting the party’s to work together. Of course there were several problems with that – 1) the GOP didn’t want to play and 2) the Dems didn’t want them to play. Dems controlled Congress at the time, so he had a chance to get GOP support with early vetoes, which he chose not to do … so DEM overreach was on its way, thus leading to voters slapping them in 2010 & more Congressional division. Oh well … that is at point my point of view. Thanks for commenting.
LikeLike
Well, I wish you had a radio show I could listen to! I don’t think I know very many independent moderates…if I do, they don’t express themselves as well as you do! I like! Debra
LikeLike
Debra,
As a whole, independent moderates tend to be socially liberal, fiscally conservative. As for me, I have a tendency to shun the “red meat” partisans like to use, I doubt if my radio show would last very long. Thanks for stopping by.
LikeLike
I think as a whole, the majority of the country is fiscally conservative and socially moderate/liberal.
LikeLike
Which actually doesn’t make sense, since being fiscally conservative means less government and more freedom, while being socially liberal means less government and more freedom. Which is to say that Americans still love freedom and are largely libertarians at heart.
LikeLike
G,
Welcome first-commenter. Given the limited parameters of your meanings, yes, it doesn’t make sense. However, as an independent moderate, I don’t have that limited lens. To top it off, if (as you say) the majority of the county is fiscally conservative and socially moderate/liberal, the majority of the country is not fairly represented. Thanks for commenting.
LikeLike
Yes, aFrank. You nailed it that we are not fairly represented. That is what I meant by it not making sense, although I believe it to be true. I think the establishment likes to keep us focused on our differences, whatever they may be, by drumming up our emotions.
LikeLike
Thank G. Interestingly, as I say if the center of the country is not represented, that also means the left and the right dominate the representation … hence the stalemate. yes, continual focusing on differences, misconceptions, and misinformation keeps the water boiling … and unfortunately, (in my view) no end is in sight.
LikeLike
Great post – too bad we can’t mold it into a vaccine and give it to everyone
LikeLike
Mouse,
Thanks so much for reading one of my all-time posts … and glad you understand my point.
LikeLike
Pingback: Flashbacks: On Politics | A Frank Angle
The almost complete nonexistence of independent moderates in the House and Senate have us locked us into the political and financial death spiral we seem to be in.
LikeLike
There’s a lot of truth here, but I have to admit I was a registered Democrat for more than 35 years. Only leaving the party a few weeks and registering as No Party Preference. I’m still essentially a Democrat, but a Democrat in the Bill Clinton-Obama mold, not a Democrat in the new world where the screaming progressives are taking over the party.
There was one point you made that rings true and it is what frustrates me about both parties these days. It is the moderates who decide elections and move the pendulum. Yet neither party seems to recognize this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark,
Thanks for visiting this relic post from my archives. The middle is full of people … center rights, center lefts, more pure centralists … and yes – not only has neither party gone after this segment, they seem to be intentionally moving away from it. In theory, a great opportunity for a third party or an independent candidate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: On Retrospect: The Posts – A Frank Angle