Should Obama just give up on Independents?

CLAIMING to be "Independents".

It's like it was in the 70's. Nixon won reelection with the largest landslide in history but after Watergate you couldn't find anyone willing to admit they voted for him.

Same goes for Bush with two twists.

Today's Conservatives have a rule. NEVER admit you are wrong. Bush turned out to be unpopular so they claim he wasn't one of them. Even though they voted for him twice and defended him tooth and nail while he was in office even after it turned out he lied about WMDs and then he engaged in torture. He was an embarrassment. Then the Tea Party came along and a Conservative could claim they weren't a Republican since Republicans were unpopular. Ron Paul provided another "Out" for hard core Republican voters to claim they were different from those "Loyal Bushies". Hell, some act like they didn't pay any attention to politics at all until Obama came along,...but their interest now isn't racial and anyone bringing that up is the racist...

The second reason they call themselves "Independents" is to throw off the polls. Think of it as a Freep. This is because they KNOW the Washington Villagers put great stock in what Independents think and base a lot of their moves on polling results of Independents. So all you have to do is say you're an independent when you are really a FOX "News" junkie who would rather dive into a pit full of spikes than let a Commie, Terrorist Loving, Democrat get into office and you have shifted the polls to make it SEEM like the "sensible part" of the country agrees with you,....and your hero Hannity....

Bottom line, these are fake Independents. People who stood in line to vote in 2008 acting like Sister Sarah was behind that curtain pulling a train.

but disagree with his premise that Independents are 'insulated from messaging.'

Have no idea what the numbers are, but suspect independents are most likely to pay attention, as distinguished from those who identify as Dem or repug.

I think what he is alluding to is that a lot of Republicans "pose" as independents. The core independents, according to him, is the thumbs up or down on how they are doing, nothing to do with political parties. That's why he thinks they are "insulated from messaging." It is an intriguing premise.

I agree with Hayes that most Indies are really one party: republiicans, who just don't want to be identified with being republicans, hence their "independent" self labeling. I agree that they are self serving and we'll probably never get them. Hayes tells us he has "caught on" to their game. I think he is right...

It's gonna all come down to who can organize the most low or non voting people that we can get organized and/or to the polls to vote. I think we have the people. The repubs now control the messaging on TV. Simple as that.

Thought it silly to identify with one party whatever they did/proposed. That, of course, was a while ago.

otherwise, no.

turn out to be right of center or hopelessly out of the political sphere (stoned or drunk). Give uo on them!

Concentrate instead of people who will naturally gravitate to your message, not ones alienated from it (they will only get more irritated the more you try to lure them!).

It's hard to corral these folks and is the equivalent of herding cats, but it has to be done...

in the name of being attractive to the mythical middle.

who think Obama is a massive sell-out, at MINIMUM!