Party Identification in Texas

 The October 2020 University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll indicates little change in party identification in Texas preceding the November 3rd general election. The question is: Generally, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or Independent? The follow-up question for independents is: Do you consider yourself a pure independent or do you lean towards the Republican or Democratic Party? For partisans, the question is: Do you consider yourself a strong or not so strong Republican (for Republicans) or do you consider yourself a strong or not so strong Democrat (for Democrats)? 

The result is this seven point scale:


The strong Republicans exceed the strong Democrats by 4 percent, but otherwise, the percentages are similar between the two parties. Independents, depending how you count "leaners," are either 13 or 37 percent. The Texas Poll considers "leaners" as partisans because their voting behavior is similar to weak partisans, and in fact, they are actually more likely to vote for the party's candidates than are weak partisans. I, on the other hand, consider "leaners" as independents who most recently have opted to vote for the candidates of a particular party and that is what this question evokes from the respondent. If I am correct, the percentage of Republicans is 33 percent, and the percentage of Democrats is 30 percent, which is in the margin of error for the poll.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whither the Republican Party?

Jonathan Rauch and Benjamin Wittes write in The Atlantic magazine: So we arrive at a syllogism: (1) The GOP has become the party of Trumpism. (2) Trumpism is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. (3) The Republican Party is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. A syllogism is, according to dictionary.com: 1. Logic. an argument the conclusion of which is supported by two premises, of which one (major premise) contains the term (major term) that is the predicate of the conclusion, and the other (minor premise) contains the term (minor term) that is the subject of the conclusion; common to both premises is a term (middle term) that is excluded from the conclusion. A typical form is “All A is C; all B is A; therefore, all B is C.”. 2. deductive reasoning. 3. an extremely subtle, sophisticated, or deceptive argument. Which definition applies here?   First, has the GOP become the party of Trump? Has he taken control of the party appa...
Read more

Choices for the Final Four (ICRC Commissions, that is)

Image
With four commission positions remaining to be filled, whom should the commissioners select? The commissioners should choose an African American male from TCCC precinct 1. Since the greatest concentrations of African Americans are located in TCCC precinct 1 (see this map ), choosing an African American from this geographic area would provide the greatest voice to the area with the highest concentration of African Americans in the city and the area that would most likely be included in a council district that would possess a plurality of African Americans. The choice should Nathaniel Bradford because of his connections to the community. An Anglo male and an Anglo female should be chosen from TCCC precinct 2. One, if not both, should be chosen from those voter precincts slightly east and west of MOPAC that featured high voter turnout in the 2012 mayoral election (see this map ). The male and female from those voting precincts who the ARP considered the most qualified are He...
Read more

In Defense of a Theory

I’m a big fan of political scientist Seth Masket, but what he wrote in defense of the theory of presidential nominations expounded in The Party Decides intrigues me. First, he notes that his initial defense caused some blowback: Last week at Mischiefs of Faction , I wrote about the book The Party Decides and the extent to which the 2016 is causing trouble for it. I argued that the Republican race isn't providing a very clean test of the theory, while the Democratic race is. This invited substantial pushback from Jonathan Chait , Justin Grimmer , and others, suggesting that I was either protecting the theory from actual testing, or that the theory itself was untestable. So I'd like to clarify a bit and suggest just what evidence we've gathered this year. Then, he goes on to explain more fully: Now, in my recent post, I focused on what I see as the central claim of the book: The party generally gets what it wants. That is, when party elites have selected a...
Read more