The Independents, The Suburbs, And Elections

We all know that independents comprise a huge swath of American voters. They are not closely affiliated with any major political party, and they include liberals, moderates and conservatives who are constantly "looking for something" in a candidate or issue upon which they are going to vote. Winning the independents is often the key to winning an election as amply demonstrated last week in Virginia and New Jersey. Where do most independent voters live? The suburbs.

I rarely agree with The New York Times on much of anything, but occasionally they get it largely right, despite themselves. This week token pseudo-conservative writer David Brooks discussed the independents, and was amazingly accurate. Even though his opening paragraph was a little excessive, it intrigued me and I went on to read his entire article. "Liberals and conservatives each have their own intellectual food chains. They have their own think tanks to provide arguments, politicians and pundits to amplify them, and news media outlets to deliver streams of prejudice-affirming stories." That packages liberals and conservatives a little too neatly, but it has a strong element of truth.

But his description of independents is spot-on. "Independents are herds of cats who find out what they think through a meandering process of discovery. Right now, independent voters are astonishingly volatile. Democrats did poorly in elections on Tuesday partly because of disappointed liberals who think that President Obama is moving too slowly, but mostly because of anxious suburban independents who think he is moving too fast." Whether they are becoming convinced that Obama should simply get out of the way remains to be seen, since much of Tuesday's election result can be attributed to local issues.

Independents are listening and choosing, and the clearer, more open and honest espousals of reasonable solutions are winning them over in droves. I happen to think that means a conservative message, but we can analyze this to death. The simple fact is that "middle-class suburban voters who have been trending Democratic for a decade have suddenly lurched out of the Democratic camp--and are now in play." And this is occurring without any significant change in overall party registration. Republicans who represented the more conservative view won handily (NY 23 is not a player in this discussion).

In Pennsylvania, there was an eight-point swing away from the Democrats among independents from just a year ago. In New Jersey, there was a twelve-point swing. In Virginia, there was a thirteen-point swing. And as Brooks reports it: "The most telling races this year were the suburban rebellions across the country. For example, in Westchester and Nassau counties in New York, Republican candidates came from nowhere to defeat entrenched Democratic county officials. In blue Pennsylvania, the GOP won six out of seven statewide offices."

So now the question becomes, if this is somewhat of an indicator of national races to come, and a clear reason for the suburban victories on Tuesday, why are the independent voters in the suburbs changing sides so quickly and in such large numbers? And Brooks gets that right, too. "The first thing to say is that this recession has hit the new suburbs hardest, exactly where independents are likely to live. According to a survey by the National Center for Suburban studies at Hofstra University, 76% of suburbanites say they or someone they know have lost a job in the past year. " Although economists may point to all kinds of favorable economic recovery indicators, unemployment has by far the greatest impact, and that number is growing rather than shrinking.

The truly telling (and heartening) element of the political turnaround is that voters are not (I repeat, not) looking to the government for support or solutions. This is big, with a capital B. Brooks reports: "Trust in government is at its lowest level in recent memory. Over the past year, there has been a shift to the right on issue after issue. According to Gallup (a Democratic firm, I might add), the percentage of Americans who believe that there is too much government regulation rose from 38 ppercent in 2008 to 45 percent in 2009. The percentage of Americans who want unions to have less influence rose fro 32 percent to a record 42 percent."

"Americans have moved to the right on abortion, immigration, and global warming. Over the past seven months, the number of people who say government is doing too many things better left to business has jumped from 40 percent to 48 percent, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. Only 31 percent of Americans believe that the president and Congress should worry more about boosting the economy even though it may mean larger budget deficits. Sixty-two percent, twice as many, believe the president and Congress should worry more about keeping the deficit down, even though it may mean it will take longer for the economy to recover." That latter statement is an indicator of conservative long-term thinking, and is a very healthy trend among independents.

Gallup recently reported that 35 percent of actual voters now identify themselves as conservative, by far the largest self-identified group, with liberals hovering at a little more or less than 20 percent. Yet among independents, those who believe there is too much government interference in business is at an astounding 50 percent, making independents more conservative on the issue than the percentage of self-identified conservatives. As Brooks puts it: "These shifts have not occurred because conservatives and liberals have changed their minds. They haven't. The shift is among independents."

This tells us that without a significant change in political party registration, independents are not turning into Republicans, they are turning to the Republican Party for conservative solutions and conservative candidates. While a namby-pamby moderate Republican might win an election simply because of Democratic backlash, it is almost a sure thing that a conservative Republican has the edge in swing districts with large numbers of independent voters. And it's important to note that for the foreseeable future, religious altar issues are far less important than dinner table issues. No matter how important social issues may be, they are not in the forefront, and too much concentration on them without a much larger emphasis on conservative solutions for economic issues can be off-putting, confusing, and vote-losing.

Brooks has issued a clarion call which all Republican candidates should heed: "Independents support the party that seems most likely to establish a frame of stability and order, within which they can lead their lives. They can't always articulate what they want, but they withdraw from any party that threatens turmoil and risk. As always, they're looking for a safe pair of hands." Democrats, particularly liberal Democrats don't understand that. Any Republican candidate who doesn't understand that basic fact is courting disaster.