Here’s why media, pollsters don’t understand independent voters

One of the least-known facts about the current state of American politics is this: Independent voters now outnumber Democrats and Republicans.
A recent Pew Research poll reaffirmed this trend, with 39 percent of those polled identifying as independents compared to 32 percent who call themselves Democrats and 23 percent who stick with the Republicans.
Yet, pollsters and the media tend to dismiss independents as simply voters who lean Republican or Democratic but like the sound of saying, “Hey, I’m an independent,” rather than expressing loyalty to a party.

Yes, the 2012 and 2014 elections saw massive increases in straight-ticket voting, which jibes with other indicators that the electorate is more polarized than ever. And independent candidates, in part due to hurdles placed in state laws, have not fared as well as some expected.

At the same time, the Independent Voters Network points out that voters are registering as independent or “no party preference” in record numbers.

For the 2014 midterm election, 23.1 percent of California’s registered voters chose to register themselves as “No Party Preference.” Similar patterns are being seen across the nation. In at least 8 states, registered independents outnumber voters registered with the traditional parties, according to IVN.

The question IVN asks is this: How can both of these concepts — that there is no such thing as a “real” independent and the growing number of registered independents — be true at the same time?

After all, in most states, registered independents cannot participate in the two-party primary process that narrows the field to nominees for the general election. Choosing an independent status comes with a price.
(It should be noted that, in addition to redistricting reform, two primary goals of activist Independents is to eliminate the closed primary and do away with straight-ticket voting.)

David Yee of IVN explains the conflicting information this way:

What’s missing is the refusal of the major media outlets to accept what it means to be an independent. This is the dialog we should be having:

* Being an independent means you can have political beliefs ranging from conservative to liberal

* Being an independent means you are not beholden to a party’s platform, agenda, cronyism, and/or endorsements.

* Being independent is a mindset, not an ideology.

* Being independent is the political flexibility to realize that there is no one perfect party, ideology, or platform.

* Being independent is the belief that government represents the people, not the organizational power of the political ilks of the politicians.

Well said, Mr Yee.