The Problem with Independent Candidates

By this point I am sure everyone is aware that the petition challenge to Nevin Mindlin and Nathaniel Curtis was upheld and both were stricken from the ballot.

If you haven't, you can check it out here.

This strange twist of events really may not be as bad as it seems. While I don't want it to appear as though Democrats are dancing on the graves of challengers to the Democratic Candidate Eric Papenfuse, now is as good a time as any to point out that there are substantial issues with independent candidates.

Mindlin and Curtis both were very vocal about one thing in particular, that they have value because they do not hold a specific party affiliation.

Quote from the Mindlin Campaign: "Nevin will be a clear, post-partisan voice with a clear vision for everyone, free of any political party agendas or “special interest” platforms".

For starters, every "interest" is special. Transit riders, land developers, even suburbanites who undoubtedly have a stake in the matter too. They all have issues that are of value to them and to say you don't derive any of your ideas from them is just silly.

Maybe what is meant by this rhetorical device is that he wont cater to the special interests which conflict with his, and his supporters vision. Here is where I find independent's messages truly lacking. Because they choose not to affiliate with a party we are not better served in our understanding of what the candidate intends to do, but actually less.

To a Democrat, using the term special interest in a derogatory fashion implies corporate powerhouses. To a Republican it usually means labor groups. What does it mean to an independent? We can't easily know because they do not have the organizational history and track record that we could use establish that information that would have if they were part of a traditional party.

This point is only further clarified when we look at both candidates histories. 

Quote from PennLive on the Curtis Campaign: "Curtis's ballot party will be Curtis for Mayor. He also confirmed he switched from a registered Republican to an unaffiliated voter this year."

Mindlin as well ran as a Republican in 2009. Both "independents" likely had good reasons to be members of the Republican party previous to this municipal election cycle, but both dumped the affiliation knowing how anemic urban centers are to the GOP. 

Independents in short like to say they are not part of a party. They are part of a party, simply one with one member and a poorly defined and understood set of principles.

This is the same reason why voters when choosing between two candidates in a general election should really just base their decision on the letter next to the name of the candidate; Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green or otherwise.

Regardless of what people like to say about how they decide who they will be voting for, the best predictor is their previous party voting record. This is good for the candidates who receive insider information (such as how to fill out a petition of candidacy) and good for the voters who receive a clear choice, in this case liberal vs. conservative.