The Raise of the Independent and Fall of the Democratic Party

from PolMach Forums
The Raise of the Independent and Fall of the Democratic Party

As I was growing up I had always heard that the Democratic party held the majority of the registered voters in the political party race. But the trend has changed dramatically in the last ten years. Here are the facts:

Totals January 2004 were[/B]: Dem. 27,301,951 (34.82%), Rep. 28,988,593 (36.97%), Indp & misc. 20,471,250 (26.11%), Constitution 320,019 (.41%), Green 298,701 (.38%), Libertarian 235,521 (.30%), Reform 63,729 (.08%), Natural Law 39,670 (.05%), other 695,639 (.89%).

Totals October 2002 were: Dem. 38,197,142 (42.68%), Rep. 29,131,899 (32.55%), Indp. & misc. 20,580,731 (22.99%), Constitution 317,926 (.36%), Green 274,740 (.31%), Libertarian 208,456 (.23%), Reform 72,556 (.08%), Natural Law 47,346 (.05%), other 674,153 (.75%).

Totals October 1998 were: Dem. 37,425,660 (44.94%), Rep. 27,695,767 (33.26%), Indp. & misc. 16,804,922 (20.18%), Constitution (then called U.S. Taxpayers) 317,510 (.38%), Reform 245,831 (.30%), Libertarian 179,255 (.22%), Green 118,537 (.14%), Natural Law 70,032 (.08%), other parties 424,101 (.51%).

Totals October 1994 were: Dem. 34,586,676 (47.13%), Rep. 24,618,092 (33.55%), Indp. & misc. 13,363,803 (18.21%), Libertarian 112,001 (.15%), Green 89,566 (.12%), Patriot 41,187 (.06%), other parties 575,784 (.78%).

http://www.ballot-access.org/2004/0201.html#1

The latest numbers are from January of 2004, so the resent voter drives from both parties may change the numbers a little. But I going to go off these numbers because it will be a long time before everybody sorts out all the bogus voter drive names from the 527’s on both sides.

These numbers show that the independents now hold over a full quarter of the registered voters, to the horror of the Democrats. This post is to hear from you, why this is happening.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

My belief: The Democratic party is no longer representing those as they once did. It is now controlled by vindictive far wing Vietnam demonstrators like Pulaski, and McCallif, that have driven the FDR/Reagan/Miller Democrat members of the party away. The base of the party once was moderate, now it is Radicl. Just look at who they chose to run for President. If the party is not reformed soon I see the continual slid ending only in the complete collapse of the party.

Thats My Two Cents

What is your thoughts?
politics
3,547 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
If the party is not reformed soon I see the continual slid ending only in the complete collapse of the party.
Said with vindictive pleasure.
Reply #2 from PolMach Forums Top
I'm skeptical of those numbers. They point to the change not being in the last ten years, but between late '02 and early '04:

Totals January 2004 were: Dem. 27,301,951 (34.82%)


Totals October 2002 were: Dem. 38,197,142 (42.68%)


Almost eleven million *fewer* democrats in a fifteen month period?

If such a huge shift were to have happeed, I think we would have seen major signs of that. It also seems that the Republicans and Independents aren't gaining those voter registrations - they're losing one to two hundred thousand registrations too. Only the other minor parties are gaining new voters, and then only by tens of thousands, not nearly enough to account for the lost voters. While some voters may have died in that time, I seriously doubt that would account for it (unless Karl Rove is secretly killing millions of democrats ).

Indeed, all totd, those numbers would say that only about 75-80 million people are registered to vote, about 25 million fewer than voted in 2000, and talk of turnout of 100-120 million this time around also contradicts those numbers, as does talk of high voter registrations among both parties.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from PolMach Forums Top
OK, I actually checked out the web page in depth. Here's what I found:


Currently, Democrats are 42%, Republicans are 33%, and 25%+ are "other."


The "JANUARY 2004 REGISTRATION TOTALS", where I assume you got your numbers from, only contains about 30 states - missing, for example, are Illinois, Michigan, etc.
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
The "JANUARY 2004 REGISTRATION TOTALS", where I assume you got your numbers from, only contains about 30 states - missing, for example, are Illinois, Michigan, etc


Yes, that is why I gave you the web site. Sorry, if the web site don't show all 50 states but I was not going to hunt every one down. You will notice that CA and NY is in (By far the largest DNC areas) and the data does not have Texas (by far the highest RNC area). If I was concealing anything I would have not given the web site.

Almost eleven million *fewer* democrats in a fifteen month period?

If such a huge shift were to have happeed, I think we would have seen major signs of that. It also seems that the Republicans and Independents aren't gaining those voter registrations - they're losing one to two hundred thousand registrations too. Only the other minor parties are gaining new voters, and then only by tens of thousands, not nearly enough to account for the lost voters.


That's the reason for this post. Maybe you have not seen it, but many people are getting sick and tired of the same old political games. Also remember we are loosing the FDR generation by the minute and the MTV generation are not as active in politics. Maybe States (like my own) cleaned their registration rosters before the big election. My state found over 2000 registered gold miners from Virginia City that died between 1920-1934 alone (Samuel Climens was another). You tell me why? That is the reason for the post.

You may think your party is strong (I am assuming your a Democrat) but that is the blinders that the current party leaders have put on. The raise of conservative talk radio and news is not fueled by Republicans alone (as you niticed their numbers didn't change much either). FOX news (cable only, not in all areas and not everybody has that) had higher rating then most the other news outlets (most on free airwaves) combined during the debates and conventions. Why? It is this lack of touch with reality that will bring the DNC down.

That's My Two Cents
Reply #5 from PolMach Forums Top
That's the reason for this post. Maybe you have not seen it, but many people are getting sick and tired of the same old political games. Also remember we are loosing the FDR generation by the minute and the MTV generation are not as active in politics. Maybe States (like my own) cleaned their registration rosters before the big election. My state found over 2000 registered gold miners from Virginia City that died between 1920-1934 alone (Samuel Climens was another). You tell me why? That is the reason for the post.


Except that the numbers for 2004 are incorrect. Democrats are not 34% of registrants but 42%. And Democrats have undoubtably *not* lost eleven million democrats.

You're right that there are many people who are sick of politics as usual and the independents are increasing there numbers - as a moderate democrat, I'm certainly not adverse to more moderates. But while the percentages of independents have increased at the expense of the democrat and republican parties, the actual registration numbers are not a zero-sum game - the number of democrats haven't been decreasing, they've been increasing, as have the republicans. The difference is that the independents have been increasing their numbers in far larger numbers than both of the major parties.

I'm sure there are a number of why this is happening - being sick of partisanship, Perot's runs, etc. But the democratic party is not on it's deathbed. There is still a close congress and polls that point towards a close election four years after a close election - I think that points to the democrats maintaining their support as a party, just that they're supplementing many of their support with support from independents who lean in their direction, just as republicans supplement their support with that of indepedents that lean in that direction.
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
Oh, I suspect to see bigger Libertarian Numbers this year, or at least one more for the Libertarians (me). The Democratic Party is no longer the party that is everything to all people, they have instead embrace some concepts that are only for a few people, which is why they are losing members to the Ind., Greens, and Socialist Party, just like the Republicans are losing numbers to the Ind., Constitution, and Libertarian. Though you can expect a bigger shift from the Dems to elsewhere just for the simple reason there are more Dems than Reps.

Who knows maybe this is the beginning of the end for the DNC as it goes the way of the Whig Party?

I suspect the Republicans may follow suit after a Democrat downfall but not immediately after the Dem downfall.

- Grim X
Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
Currently, Democrats are 42%, Republicans are 33%, and 25%+ are "other."


You forgot to add the rest of the paragraph:

For years now, the percentage of people registered in the major parties has been slowly declining. In 1992, 48% of voters in the "registration states" were Democrats, and 34% were Republicans, leaving only 18% of the voters in other categories. Currently, Democrats are 42%, Republicans are 33%, and 25%+ are "other."

This show that even with all 50 states the Democrats have lost 6% and the Republican lost 1% with in a ten year time period.

I was using the 30 state voter number data provided by the web site for you to use in analyzes.

That is still a sharp decline. After this election and the Democrats blame their rank and file for losing like they did last time, the decline will be accelerated.

And Democrats have undoubtably *not* lost eleven million democrats.


What did I say above: "Blinders", this is one of the reasons why the Democrats refuse to see that reform is needed.

That’s My Two Cents