On November 26 of last year, we posted two articles here entitled: ‘Election Results and Analysis’ and ‘The People have spoken’. Based on the closeness of the various races in the House as well as the Senate, we concluded that the results reflected a shift among moderate voters, the consistent 15 percent of the American voters who determine the outcome of elections more times than not. They are individuals, who have no political party allegiance, nor do they appear to have a very strong value system, they are neither conservative nor are they liberal. They can switch their votes from election to election as to how they see things from their flexible perspective. They claim to be true intellectuals in that they can perceive issues from their neutral positions. They also claim to have high moral standards based on their own definition of such standard. Webster’s Dictionary defines ‘moderate’ in nine different ways, all essentially being not extreme, not excessive and keeping within reasonable limits and so on.
In the run-up to last November’s congressional elections, the Democrats and the media kept the focus on the Republican excesses in the previous years, they continually pounded the apparent corruption among Republicans and then got about six weeks worth of negative propaganda about a Congressman from Florida who had sent dubious e-mails and instant messages to a former page of his in Congress. The Republicans did not have an effective defense against these charges and so, the moderates decided that it was time for a change and voted ‘Democrat’.
While it is way to early to seriously think about the next elections in November 2008, it would be interesting to find out how the switch-voting element in the American voting public, our average middle-of-the-road moderate, views the performance to date by the Democrat leadership in Congress. Since they are moderates and despise extremes, they cannot possibly share the hatred the so called ‘Left’ shows towards President Bush. But are they genuinely impressed by what the Democrats have accomplished in their first four months in charge of Congress? Do they agree with the political football the Democrats are playing with the funding of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan while claiming to fully support the troops? Did they like it when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried her craft at foreign policy when she visited dictator Basher Assad of Syria while she then had a hard time finding it in her heart to accept an invitation by the President in the White House? Is it ok for the moderate switch voters when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid makes a definitive statement about the status of the war in Iraq? Can a moderate voter figure out what a Democrat means when he or she is against the war but supports our troops even though he or she votes against providing funds for the troops in Iraq?
It would be interesting to hear from the switch-voting moderates who were so bothered by the corruption of Republicans and the impropriety of a House Republican who sent questionable e-mails to a former employee that they decided, it was time for a change in Congress. We wonder who in the media or in polling institutions would find it worthwhile to check into this matter and come back with answers from those moderates.
This article and others on Back to Common Sense are designed to provoke further thought and investigation. It is not the intent for the articles to be politically biased. Sources are referenced in each article to encourage readers to delve into the supporting material. We welcome all readers to participate with their point of view either in support or contrary with additional information sources.