Search

Survey respondents who identify themselves as Independents and concede that they are closer to one or the other party usually vote for that party's candidates. Our conclusion that this meant that most professed Independents were really partisans was challenged by scholars who provided other interpretations. This article tests those alternative interpretations, finds them wanting, and adds further evidence to affirm our earlier conclusion: most leaners vote as they do because they are more partisan than independent, and are not neutral, but are nearly as committed to a party as those who explicitly identify with that party. We analyse the leaners' participation in presidential primaries, the stability over time of their voting choices and party identification, and their attitudes toward the two parties. Some use had been made of these variables by scholars trying to salvage the original view of party identification associated with the University of Michigan or the later revisionism. Thorough analysis shows that the three sorts of Independents (Democratic, Republican and Pure Independents) do not display a common pattern of behaviour and belief that sets them apart from outfight partisans. This is true only of the Pure Independents: the leaners resemble weak partisans of their respective parties. These findings show that the highly publicized decline of the party system revealed by growing proportions of Independents is very much exaggerated. Finally, we evaluate the alternative measures of party identification introduced in 1980, and find them less useful than the traditional measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]