Independents: What exactly are you hoping for?

First of all, if you are a devoted Republican or Democrat, you will strongly disagree with much of this article. And that’s fine. I am not going to change your mind.

If you are of the Tea Party persuasion, the odds are very good that you are currently employed (or independently wealthy) but not a union member, and that you make a decent living and have good healthcare provided by your employer. Since your communal structure is adequate to your needs, you can afford to take a fiscally libertarian stance when it comes to government. You solution is to generate outrage and fear based on wild accusations as to Obama’s motives and even his heritage. It is disgusting but it has been effective. I actually agree that we need to examine the long term effects of the fiscal decisions being made by our legislators. And I have no problem with vigilance in protecting the constitution. But rational arguments are getting dragged through something that looks like mud but is far less appealing.

If you are a devoted Progressive, then you think the stimulus was too small, that healthcare reform made too many compromises, and that the Obama administration has not brought nearly as much social change as you had hoped. You wanted us completely out of both Iraq and Afghanistan, an end to “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, a single payer healthcare system, and an end to tax breaks for the wealthy. You solution is to sit out this election cycle in protest. I don’t get it. A president only has so much power and you really could not have expected all of this to happen in the space of two years. Your reaction seems irrational to me. Though, personally, I am relieved that the administration has taken a common sense approach to the wars.  And that it doesn’t get everything it wants.

More than 50% of voters now identify themselves as independent as the parties have swung to extremes and become ever more polarized. In 2008, independents were responsible for installing a Democrat as president. In 2006, Democrats gained control of both the House and the Senate, again largely because of the unease of independents. Yet, now independents have swung toward the Tea Party and may become the driving force behind another change of control in legislative leadership. Why? The conventional wisdom is that they are disappointed with the fiscal policies of the last two years. I find this baffling. As an independent myself, I have experienced little surprise or disappointment in what has transpired.

I am not comfortable with the large numbers associated with the stimulus and deficits. But the administration and legislative leaders have done exactly what they said they would do. And I don’t know that we had any other good options. Goodness knows that we didn’t hear any solutions coming from the Republican peanut gallery — the word “No” is not a solution.

Why would I be surprised at the nature of the healthcare reform? The actual legislation is more conservative than what was being proposed throughout the 2008 campaigns. Exactly what part of that legislation caught you off guard?

The bailouts were well underway before the administration took office and with the support of a Republican administration who felt that some Wall Street firms were too big to fail. The bailout of GM may have ruffled feathers. But do you really want to think about what would have happened if you had put 1 million more workers on the street looking for jobs? Ironically, that story may have turned out better than anybody had a right to expect. GM has started turning a profit. So how does that disappoint you?

I understand the hyperbolic rhetoric coming from the right, they see an opportunity to regain power by capitalizing on the fact that Democrats did not pull off a miracle. But I do not really understand the fickleness of the portion of independents who did vote to give Obama a chance. He has been in office not quite two years. Predictions of 12% unemployment and a decade of recession, if not a depression, did not materialize. The recession ended several months ago. Unemployment remains uncomfortably high but that is the hardest problem by far to solve and one the stimulus had less impact on than expected. The US economy is recovering, very slowly, but recovering from self-inflicted wounds. There is no administration that can cure a hangover of the  magnitude we continue to experience. We the people bought a lot snake oil over several administrations, with dot-coms that made no profit but were worth hundreds of dollars a share, then housing. A lot people were told they could buy a half million dollar home for $800 a month and they did. But they couldn’t. The laws of economics didn’t change.

So a nation that has embraced strategic defaults on their promises to pay is disappointed Daddy hasn’t made it all better. Yet we don’t know how bad it really would have been if we had not swiftly pumped money into the economy.