Gallup has an update on partisanship trends today. Links at end of this thread
I want to address the “leaned” vs “unleaded” party issue. Do “partisans” include independents who lean to a party, or not. Similarly, does “independents” include leaners or not, a how it matters
Gallup question wording is slightly different from the wording many academics use. “In politics as of today” vs “generally speaking” has modest difference but not the issue I care about which is how much difference is there between leaners and partisans.
Rep leaners are 11% and Dem leaners 13%. That close symmetry has been pretty stable. You get more partisans (obviously) if you include leaners as partisans, and more independents if you call them independents. The Gallup headline is based on calling them independent.
The “academic” question wording also asks partisans if they are “strong” or “not very strong” (ie “weak”) partisans. Here you also see 11-12% are weak & just under 20% are strong for each party.
Here are Gallup’s party ID trends since 2004, with leaners separate from partisans or pure independents.
How do these groups differ?
Some claim leaners are “really partisans”. That isn’t right.
They are more partisan than pure independents, but not as partisan as those who pick a party on the 1st question. I know nuance is hard, but leaners are indeed leaners and not committed partisans.
You also see lack of partisan commitment in the “someone else” and “wouldn’t vote” percentages that rise to the middle of the PID scales.
Also note how “weak” are different from “strong” partisans. Sometimes less partisan than lean, sometimes not.
Here is Biden approval by partisan lean and strength. Similar to the vote choice above, though Reps and lean Rep are quite similarly negative, and “weak Reps” a little more approving. More monotonic w Dem strength.
Here is a comparison of favorably to Trump and to Biden by Party ID with leaners.
Both partisans and leaners equally despise the other party’s guy.
But note in both parties leaners are less favorable to their party’s guy than are partisans.
Negative partisanship is strong.
Another big difference is attention to politics. More partisan means more attention, with pure independents especially less attentive, though “weak” partisans are close to pure inds
Among other things this means leaners & weak are slower to pick up on issues and candidates
It’s easy to focus on size of each group. Inds tend to grow in non-election years, then decline close to elections
But “are they independent or hidden partisans” is important & the answer is learners are in between. Less party loyalty in votes than partisans, but clearly lean.
In an election, partisans vote w party >90% but leaners typically in the 80s. They can also push that up or down depending on the candidates. They aren’t “swing voters” but that lower loyalty and potential for more or less loyalty is important in election outcomes.
Links to Gallup trends in partisanship, showing 49% “independent” but that includes leaners!
The tables are great and go back to 2004. Also have table w leaners as partisans. 43R-43D-14 Ind
This Axios story is misleading. It combines independents who lean to a party with “purely” inds. Dem & Rep are modestly down, leaners up a bit, pure Ind still low teens. See full data 2004-23 below. Leaners vote w party but less than partisans
Philip Bump also has a story on this, in part emphasizing the changes are much less than the Axios headline.
Washington Post story link here
I don’t care for the WaPo headline. These aren’t “independents who vote party” but people who say they are independents AND who say they lean to a party and mostly vote that way, but less so than partisans, more so than independents who don’t lean.
Most important just look at the full data and there are not sharp or sudden shifts. Relative stability over 19 years with some modest but important shifts (a bit more leaners, bit fewer partisans) and little change in pure independents.
Ignore “big change” headlines.
