Seems like a bit of talking past-ism involved in this thread. I see Perotista’s poll watching and analysis as just that, reporting on polling, which does have a connection to elections. What the data show, however, has really nothing to do with judging what is is right, or best for the country.
The use of the word partisan implies ‘political party’, or political lean. What it glosses over is that many people favor certain ethics and principles, and hope to see them prevail in our government and society, which may align more with the direction of one of the parties. Voting for candidates of that party does not necessarily mean they are ‘partisan’. I would call this group thinking independents.
It seems like far more people make their decisions based on team/tribal loyalty, which is clearly ‘partisan’.
I think there is yet another set of people who are mostly influenced by marketing - these would call themselves independents, but are actually gullible marks for con men. This is today a large group. The swings we see in the polls show when the cons are working and when they are not.
