Partisan Identification

Most voters develop an attachment to a political party early in life that generally becomes stronger as they grow older. Identification with a political party serves an important purpose for voters who have limited time to spend studying political issues and candidates. By selecting a party that most closely mirrors their own political and ideological preferences, voters can use the party affiliation of political candidates as a “cue” to help them decide who to vote for in the absence of other, more specific information about the candidates. The use of such cues or decision-making shortcuts is not unique to voting — people use them in dozens of different contexts each day. Party identification is a way for busy people to simplify an otherwise complex and time-consuming decision.

During the 1970s and 1980s, a surprisingly large number of survey respondents began identifying themselves as “Independent” instead of as either a Republican or a Democrat. Many people quickly assumed that this meant voters were behaving independently when they voted and that party affiliation was not as important as it once was in their decision-making on election day. However, careful analysis of public opinion data suggests that the notion that voters have abandoned party ID is a “myth.” For example, a voter who identified him or herself as an “Independent” but admitted to “leaning” toward the Democratic Party is just as likely to vote for Democratic candidates as voters who identify themselves as Democrats. Indeed, in the table below (Table 6–3), independent “leaners” are grouped with those who identified with a party. The numbers tell the story — more than 80 percent of those who identify with or lean toward a party voted for the presidential candidate of their preferred party. While some voters apparently prefer to portray themselves as “independent,” most of them persist in basing their votes on party labels.

While partisan identification remains the most important predictor in voting, it is less important today than it once was. Most notably, voters have shown a much greater willingness to vote for candidates of the opposite party. The most powerful evidence of this is the dramatic increase in “split-ticket” voting, or the casting of votes for people of different parties, in the same election. (For example, a voter who splits his or her ticket might vote for the Republican presidential candidate but the Democratic Senate candidate.)