re: Truly don't understand how anyone can consider themselves an "Independent" at this point

quote:

---

Until the R’s do something about term limits, taxes and sending billions to foreign countries, I’ll remain an Independent.

---

What he said.

I am a registered Independent and I vote (R) down the line. I register as an Independent because it's my little way to say that I won't label myself as part of a group that I vote for, when their members actively stand with Democrats, and or block the conservative agenda.

If I have to choose between frick ups like Bill Cassidy and Dem's, I will simply vote for another non winning (R) if there is one, or not vote in that slot at all. People like him and these other frick up Rino's in the house and senate.

It's a lesser of two evils choice. Nothing more. Making that choice doesn't require a label.

It’s easy when neither party seems to have your best interest or that of the country in mind. Whether it be constant identity politics of the left (although the right seems to be taking that and running with it) or the celebrating authoritarianism / higher taxes / foreign wars / kissing arse to dictator regimes coming from the right. Neither party represents me

I've given up on the idea for now. I've registered as a Republican. I don't agree with Republicans on everything but there's almost nothing I agree on with Democrats .... that and even if they did come out and change their policies on a lot of things, I have zero confidence they can carry out anything with substance.

It all boils down to the individual candidate.

But the Democratic Party would have to drop the concern for unpopular social issues that continue to get them crushed in general elections. If they focus on the sticking to the US Constitution they might make more headway.

And the Republican Party is fractured between populist MAGA sect that seems to favor authoritarianism (going away from the US Constitution) and the traditional limited govt focused sect of the GOP.

The neocons were no less authoritarian than the MAGAs.

That’s the next step or the bottom of the slippery slope.

Political parties started as tools to organize coalitions, coordinate votes, and structure debate in a republic. But once identity replaces judgment, the tool starts using the person. Now conformity matters more than truth. A rep can vote with leadership 100 percent of the time and survive policy failures. Defect once on principle, and he’s a traitor. That tells you where party priorities actually lie.

The Constitution anticipated factions, but it didn’t sanctify them. Parties were meant to compete inside the framework, not become the framework and the object of loyalty itself. When team allegiance outranks constitutional restraint, you fricked up somewhere.

Party politics distort incentives. They reward outrage and symbolic voting. Governance takes a backseat to purity tests and signaling. Voters get conditioned to treat politics like sports fandom instead of problem solving. Disagreement stops being “you’re wrong” and becomes “you’re the enemy.” That justifies escalation and normalizes contempt.

Exhibit A: this board.

A republic can survive disagreement. It cannot survive permanent internal warfare.

Independence isn’t the absence of belief. It’s the refusal to outsource judgment to a permanent team. It’s saying no caucus, platform, or talking point gets veto power over your reasoning. Human beings are biased. Binding yourself to an institution that amplifies that bias is not wisdom. It’s comfort.

Parties offer belonging. Independence demands thought. One flatters instinct. The other preserves self-government.

The two party system is killing us. The Democrats are pushing socialism and the Republicans are compromising their way to socialism. They only two Republican members of Congress that actively reject the socialist compromises are ridiculed here incessantly.