.webp)
Part Two
To be considered a third force or a group that can be moved by a campaign we had to prove that independent voters have a degree of shared values and significant cohesion, or at least as much as voters who belong to the parties.
This analysis incorporated traditional polling, focus groups, video interviews, and extensive data capture and analysis from social media, traditional media, and search/advertising data. Data insights were tested in follow-up polls, A/B/n tests through social and traditional advertising, and by applying various machine learning and data science techniques, including propensity to engage/support (predictive), discrepancies analysis (cohesion), issue relationship analysis, trending topics (energizing and fatiguing language), sentiment, and our own modeling based on the Nolan Chart and model.
This leading framework analyzes political alignment outside the binary left/right perspective by employing innovative techniques using an LLM approach to assess long-form question/answers.
We modeled data on Democrats, Republicans, and independents, including whether independents lean Republican or Democrat. We further analyzed these groups based on age, comparing millennials and younger individuals to older ones. We tested at the national level and in several swing states, such as Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Our own polling found that about 39% identified as independent. We also captured whether they leaned Democrat (31%) or Republican (30%), to help us analyze differences in social and economic policies. We found these voters were more moderate and centrist on balance.
When we unpacked the data for all voters, including independents, and further refined the analysis for demographic cohorts, we found additional indicators that support our analysis showing that moderate and centrist voters, specifically independents, form a distinct audience. The green bars representing independent voters clock in at the lowest discrepancy, meaning they are the most cohesive of the groups.
To further analyze the independent voters, we classified them as leaning Democrat (orange), Independent (green), and leaning Republican (burgundy). We can see that overall, independent voters lean toward the center-right, and there is greater discrepancy – less cohesion – among Republicans and Democrats.
We asked similar questions about their views on social and economic policies. The results showed a more moderate and centrist position, with a left lean on social issues and a right lean on economic matters. In other words, these independents are forming a modern, cohesive classical liberalism.
The divide between left social issues and right economic issues poses an obstacle to independents being recognized as an audience. Cohesion is necessary for this group to become a distinct force, indicating they have shared values instead of simply being undecided or uncommitted voters. We studied the variations in their responses, both between and within each group based on age. Our analysis revealed more variation among Democrat voters than Republicans, and the least among independents.
To understand how this analysis could be used to examine the types of policies that would appeal to independents, we also needed to find the language and messaging that represented and resonated with their values and beliefs. Simply using the vocabulary of Democrats or Republicans would not help us understand these voters.
In this analysis, we found strong alignments to the messaging language, including choice, tolerance, competition, merit, equal opportunity (not equity of outcome), fairness, transparency, and various other terms.
We also found that independents think about issues holistically and connect issues with related issues. For example, when asked about criminal justice reform, independents don’t simply talk about sentencing and recidivism rates. They understand that ancillary policies around education and social work, for example, impact criminal justice issues. They recognize that issues don’t exist in isolation; rather, they see the relationships between them.
In the polling data, we see that independents frequently split the ticket because they don’t believe one party has all the answers. This is a powerful position, as both parties need to play to these voters and field social and economic policies that will appeal to them in order to win.
When we adopted this analysis into our polling and conducted surveys on issues like education, healthcare, government, and the economy, the data consistently showed that voters want choices and more private sector competition. In almost every case, we had a pluralistic majority choose the “choice” option.
In analyzing the data on social issues, we found that moderate alignment was more about tolerance. Social tolerance may appear to be left-leaning on issues like women's reproductive rights and gay marriage. However, in today’s world, these beliefs hardly define a left-wing voter; rather, they reflect what is commonly accepted — a “live and let live” attitude. This aligns comfortably with even the traditional sense of classical liberalism.
Independent voters consistently rated key economic issues like affordability, inflation, taxes, and the economy as the most important factors in determining their vote. We found that overall, they favored a balanced moderate view that leaned towards a limited government role in rule setting and protection while enhancing private sector options to provide voters with more choices. Voters preferred having the freedom to make their own decisions rather than being told by the government what they can and cannot do.
The focus on millennials is highly relevant to the potential future for a modern classical liberal opportunity.
Is this enough to suggest that a new, powerful, independent voting bloc can be defined as something like a classical liberal? These are promising signs that a new and exciting modern version of classical liberalism is emerging, especially among Millennial voters.
