Voters up for grabs

OPINION:

Independent voters drifted in a new direction in American politics over the last 15 years, creating new challenges and opportunities for both parties. Between the 1970s and the early 1990s they voted with a distinct Republican tilt at the presidential level — a majority sided with the GOP in every election from 1972 until 1992. But in the last four presidential contests — beginning in 1992 — independent voters moved slightly toward the Democrats. Predicting these voters’ electoral behavior over the last decade or so — while always tricky — has become even more complicated. But because neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have a majority on their own, independent voters will again tip the balance in 2008.

As the chart below demonstrates, beginning in the early 1990s, the independents’ GOP “tilt” vanished. Bill Clinton edged out President George H.W. Bush among these voters in 1992 by a 38 percent-32 percent margin (Ross Perot’s candidacy that year accounts for the balance of the independent vote). President Clinton won the independent vote by 8 points in 1996. In 2000 and 2004, independents split almost down the middle. Then-Gov. George W. Bush edged out Senator Al Gore 47 percent to 45 percent, but President Bush narrowly lost this group to Senator John Kerry in 2004 — the first time in modern history a candidate won the White House but lost the independent vote. So after two decades of leaning toward Republican presidents, independents are now up for grabs.

Sorting out why this shift occurred is complicated. But let me offer a few possibilities. First, as I mentioned in a recent column in The Washington Times, independents are more ideologically diverse than either Republicans or Democrats. Independents include conservative foot soldiers in the Ron Paul revolution as well as liberal backers of Ralph Nader. They are not as monolithic as many media accounts might suggest. And independents differ a great deal from Republicans and Democrats on a variety of political variables. For example, they exhibit lower turnout levels, knowledge of issues and attention to politics. This ideological diversity, as well as their lower level of knowledge and participation, could make independents a more volatile political cohort. Second, it’s possible that following the Reagan years and then the election of George H.W. Bush in 1988, some conservative-leaning independents began identifying themselves as Republicans in surveys. That might have left the balance of the “independent” camp configured a little differently and perhaps more inclined to support Democrats for president.

I also believe Mr. Clinton’s efforts to position himself as a “new Democrat” during the 1990s might explain some of the movement. His centrist rhetoric convinced some independent voters that Democrats had learned lessons and moved away from the McGovern-Mondale-Dukakis liberal model.

After Mr. Bush won the White House in 2000, creating the first unified Republican government since the 1950s, Republican numbers rose again, with some moving out of the independent camp. But, again, those who remained likely had concerns about centralized power. Polling data show independents prefer divided government to unified control by either party.

Finally, over the last several years, the war in Iraq has driven some independents toward the Democrats. On foreign-policy measures, independents lean toward an isolationist posture. The war has caused many of them to align more with the Democrats at the ballot box, while still maintaining their “independent” label with pollsters.

Taken together, these factors help explain much of the independent drift over the past 15 years. This group is by no means a Democratic constituency. But they do represent a true swing group, with many open to both Republican and Democratic arguments. The best way to describe them is not liberal, moderate or conservative, or even leaning Republican or Democrat. They are unpredictable and volatile. And whichever party figures out how to woo a majority of these Americans also will win the presidential election in 2008.