Talk:Independent (voter)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is related to the WikiProject Politics, an attempt to improve, organise and standardise Wikipedia's articles in the area of Politics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.. |
|||
Contents |
[edit] Independents in Primary Elections
In the US, independent voters are allowed to vote in some primary elections- it varies from state to state. Forming an independent party would definately not guarantee independents the oppurtunity to participate in primaries which they are currently barred from. If the Anon who made this claim knows something that I don't, they should back it up with sources. For now I will remove it as I believe it is simply untrue. J. Tyler 05:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the unenrolled article is a mess. Even if it accepted as a US-only article, this varies from state to state. In roughly half of the states you have to register with a party affiliation to participate in that party's process of selecting candidates (by primary election and/or caucus), in roughly half you don't. Even "unenrolled" is a regional usage. The Independent voter article already covers this, accurately. No merge. Lisamh 02:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Registered affiliation - not 'uniquely American'??
People in the UK can choose to join the Conservatives, Labour etc, so surely this classes as non-American 'registered affiliation'. Can someone please confirm I've understood this correctly before I/they remove the sentence "Registered affiliation with a single political party is a uniquely American concept." Cheers, Jilly 13:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC) It sounds that some American thinks the world begins and ends with the USA. I am an American and its lauphable. Merlinus
[edit] Merging with Unenrolled
I don't think it should include unenrolled. The concept of an independent voter is not just American one. It's especially misleading considering there are 'Chapters' of unenrolled voters. One would consider independents not associated with any form of political organisation wouldn't they? Anyway, I think this needs to be discussed. Shudda 13:03, 6 April 2006 (+13GMT)
- I don't believe it should include Unenrolled either. Unenrolled is merely a really obscure synonym for independent (I've never heard it outside wikipedia). There really should be just one article for independent voters and it should be this one. J. Tyler 00:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, don't merge it. Especially since there is a line on unenrolled that says that unenrolled voters typically vote for a Republican or a Democrat after weighing the options. I do not believe this to be true of independents. Tromboneguy0186 06:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
A clear distinction between Unenrolled voters and Independent voters needs to be made, and as a non-American I would like an explaination as to why anyone would willingly disclose their policial affiliation to anyone. I was under the impression that the USA ran secret ballots, just like all other good democracies. Josh Parris#: 03:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] No Unenrolled
Unenrolled should not be merged with Independent voter. There is a distinct difference between those who are undecided or unenrolled and those who are registered Independents.
Those who are undecided or unenrolled are undecided. Those who are registered independents have made a decision and they choose to retain individual thought, as well as vote for any candidate of ANY party (or independent) that they individually feel is the right choice.
Unenrolled is completely different than Independent. Can't imagine why anyone would want to merge these.Fl295 00:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Independent party
Why is there a link to an independent party? Isn't that an oxymoron? Josh Parris#: 06:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 1 out of the 535 members of Congress?
Despite previously running as a democrat, Senator Joe Liebrman ran as an independent in the latest midterm elections. Shouldn't we include Senator Joe Lieberman as an independent as well? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.113.139.23 (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC).
