Do you identify with your registered political party?

[bascule]

I bring this up mainly out of one of my main beefs with the Democratic party. As a liberaltarian there's many issues I'm diametrically opposite to the Democrats on. These are things like gun control, free speech (vs. PC speech), musicians rights, video game producers rights, etc.

 

Because of these main disparities, I refer to the Democrats in the 3rd person. I typically call them "The Democrats", as in "I hope the Democrats don't..."

 

However, I'm a registered Democrat. This is so I can vote in the Democratic party (and put in for my progressive/liberaltarian candidates of choice)

 

I think this is a bit weird. Most people refer to their political party of choice in the first or second person. "My party" or "we". We better end the war and oust Bush! That's why we won the election!

 

What about you?

[ecoli]

Independent, and proud of it.

 

I can't identify with either of the major parties, or even most of the minor ones.

[ParanoiA]

Libertarian. Only because that's the closest established ideology to representing my views. Neither of the major parties embody this completely, so I'm constantly pissed at both of them.

 

There are hardly any libertarians that get elected for anything. Never really thought about it but I think I'd still refer to them in the 3rd person. I don't know why. Maybe, deep down, I don't want to receive the same grief I give the others and so alienate myself from all of them...?

[Pangloss]

I'm registered as a Republican for voting purposes only (I'm not a member of the party). It gives me the right to vote in Republican primaries. There's no way to vote in both party's primaries, so if I want to vote in a primary I have to be registered in a party. I think it's a scam that perpetuates the problem that 60-80% vote along party lines. EVERY vote should be a "swing" vote, IMO. But if I don't participate in it then I miss out on more than half of my franchisal influence.

 

Ideologically I identify a bit more with Republicans than I do with Democrats, although I've actually voted for more Democrats than Republicans, counting local elections.

[ParanoiA]

I think it's a scam that perpetuates the problem that 60-80% vote along party lines. EVERY vote should be a "swing" vote, IMO.

 

I've always had a similar thought process. The fact we have "parties" creates the competitive us versus them psychology. Makes us completely forget the whole point in governing and shifts our focus and energy on beating the "other side".

 

But then, I also wonder about the sense in not having parties. You'll still end up having parties because it will just be tracked and labeled in a different way. I don't know that there is a practical way to avoid that.

[Pangloss]

Oh they can have parties. They can even limit the people who vote in their primaries to people who only vote in one primary or the other. They just need to allow people to pick which primary they're going to vote in at the time they walk into the voting booth (instead of having to go downtown and fill out special paperwork, etc). That puts the emphasis on individual franchise, not party success.

[jackson33]

in theory, members of a party should be allowed to pick the candidate of choice in their party. this purpose has been lost for several reasons, including disruption of the intent.

 

as a voting republican, my philosophical choice would be libertarian. however in the recent past, especially in Congress, i see little if any difference. the trend *Big Government* has been adopted by both major parties in an effort to buy votes. additionally there is an on going attempt by congress to take power from the presidency. this too, is from both major parties.

 

the 08 elections, will probably set up an atmosphere where a third party can be effective. not only in the obvious sway of the winners, but to become a viable choice. a Rudy/Hillary or any combination of the current declared field will easily produce this atmoshere....IMO.

[Haezed]

Nope. I'm unelectable by either party.

[Sisyphus]

I really doubt anyone would say "yes." To actually admit that you're just a partisan implies you can't think for yourself. So people usually don't see themselves that way, even when they basically are.

[ParanoiA]

I really doubt anyone would say "yes." To actually admit that you're just a partisan implies you can't think for yourself. So people usually don't see themselves that way, even when they basically are.

 

I don't know. No one agrees with their party 100%. So, to some degree they must be thinking for themselves. And some people might say they are one way or another because 70% of their beliefs are represented.

 

Also, consider that ideologies are usually driven by themes ( or emotional aversions as one person put it... ), that result in ideas in the same basic direction. So, thinking for yourself could still result in lining up with your party's beliefs remarkably.

[the tree]

How many people in America are actually registered with a political party?

 

Currently, in the UK, there is no party that I particularly idenfify with (that being said, I did vote today, but my choice was only due to a few local issues) and I'd be wary of being a member, even if it did allow me to poke them in the right direction.