Bloomberg Wants Independents To Organize To Increase Power

,

It’s like the old cliche popular in Spain in the 1970s after the death of dictator Francisco Franco when Spain successfully transitioned to democracy: if anarchists are really anarchists, how could they organize or even think about running for elections?

And now, in a new twist on that thought, there’s an idea from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who sparked an epidemic of political navel-gazing about his 2008 Presidential aspirations (he decided not to jump into the fray) earlier this year: independent voters should organize and vote as a bloc in November.

In other words: just as Democrats and Republicans are prone to vote how their party wants them to, independent voters would be asked to be sure to vote how the people heading an organization or how a prominent independent voter says they should vote. If not, it will be implied that they are short-sighted voters, not voting for the greater independent voter good but selfishly (independently).

Never mind that for many voters being an independent voter means you shop around a bit more, take criticism because you want to read and listen and ask more questions, ignoring claims you have to vote a certain way to be a loyal and good member of a political group or that you’re wishy-washy or without principles because you don’t automatically back a certain party’s agenda or pick up a party’s talking points.

But Bloomberg wants independent voters to be — other-directed independent voters according to the New York Times:

He has officially ruled out an independent bid for the presidency and dismissed the idea of changing term limits laws in New York City so he can run for mayor a third time. Talk of his potential selection as a running mate for one of the presidential candidates has also died down. Still, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg continues to find ways to play a role on the national political stage.

He has officially ruled out an independent bid for the presidency and dismissed the idea of changing term limits laws in New York City so he can run for mayor a third time. Talk of his potential selection as a running mate for one of the presidential candidates has also died down. Still, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg continues to find ways to play a role on the national political stage.

“Just because we’re independents doesn’t mean we can’t, or shouldn’t, organize,” said Mr. Bloomberg, a longtime Democrat who became a Republican when he first ran for mayor seven years ago and then relinquished all ties to political parties last summer. “That’s how you shape the debate and win elections.”

Still, Bloomberg is no dummy. He addressed head on the teeney-weenie complication of independent voters now being asked to become like other voting blocs and vote according to how someone else wants them to vote so that others can use their political values to proclaim how they voted was the “correct way’ if they are independent voters:

The suggestion seems counterintuitive, as autonomy and individualism are sacrosanct among independents. And Mr. Bloomberg said as much in his remarks, recognizing that his idea might sound “antithetical” at first glance. But he also said that political independence has sometimes morphed into chaos, with like-minded voters resembling “an unorganized mass of individuals who can’t agree on anything.”

“We have to start demonstrating to the candidates that we have what they need more than anything else: votes,” he said.

He’s correct: the problem becomes trying to find a way to harness the power of one of the fastest growing groups of voters in the American policy.

When it comes to being an independent, Bloomberg has seemingly walked the walk, but taken heat for it when he praises one candidate or another. He now insists he is not ready to endorse yet and might not until election day. That is how many independent voters vote.

Before he recently spoke in Minnesota, Republicans reportedly put out the word that he was going to praise Republican presumptive nominee Sen. John McCain in a speech and virtually endorse the Arizona Senator., He took heat from members of Minnesota’s Independence Party for his alleged plans. But when the moment came, Bloomberg did no such thing, making it clear his concern was an independent voter political infrastructure, rather than jumping on a specific candidate’s bandwagon before the conventions are even held.

Bloomberg’s high profile name has been batted about as a possible running mate for both McCain and the Democrat’s likely nominee Sen. Barack Obama — but mostly by pundits. There were political rumors several months ago about McCain-Bloomberg. And rumors about an Obama-Bloomberg ticket. But the speculation about the New York millionaire running on a major party ticket as Veep or even launching his own bid proved to be just that.

Bloomberg’s idea about increased independent voter clout is a practical one. There have been quiet efforts in the past on the part of some to look into whether it was possible to organize an independent voter PAC. And there are third parties that have used the name “independent” in their title.

But independent voters aren’t independent voters if they’re told by a bigwig or organization that they must vote a certain way or take certain stands in order to be independent. Republicans will have their own idea of what is independent (supporting them in the end) as will Democrats (supporting them in the end).

And someone suggesting that independent voters should let their votes be influenced by what an independent voter group tells them is the “correct” stance or by some rich or not-so-rich bigwig who is an independent telling them what is in the interest of them being independents seems destined for two things:

1. If an organization came about, it would be in danger of becoming just one more political group with self-interest and a specific agenda that could be influenced by interests and political personalities. It’d be one more “group think” political mechanism.

2. Any such organization would face an uphill battle since many true independent voters will treat its suggestions as they treat other those from political parties: something to seriously consider but not something that they are compelled in any way to be bound by out of any need to be defined by others when they finally cast their ballots.

But other inquiring — and independent — minds may disagree…