Why is it when a major news organization writes about swing-voters or undecideds or even â€œmoderatesâ€ the story is either written with condescension or with an anthropological reverence, like theyâ€™ve uncovered some primitive and mysterious tribe? The latest â€œreportâ€ on undecided voters comes from the AP and is based on a Knowledge Networks poll .
The shocking conclusion? Undecided voters tend to have some conservative views and some liberal ones. They also have a healthy distrust of politicians in general.
Wow. I hope the AP will also reveal to me that Democrats are liberals and Republicans are conservatives. And the Pope is Catholic.
Whatâ€™s most interesting in the story is that undecided voters are at one point labeled kingmakers and at another point painted as unengaged and disinterested. Just because a voter doesnâ€™t like either political party doesnâ€™t make him or her unengaged â€“ it just means thereâ€™s no outlet for their political beliefs. If they were truly unengaged, they wouldnâ€™t be voters at all. Theyâ€™d be non-voters.
At some point, I hope the media will stop treating voters who donâ€™t fit the easy Republican/Democrat labels as a sideshow and will start giving those votersâ€™ beliefs a more comprehensive look.