Fake Independents, who claimed independence but who voted straight ticket, in most cases preferred Democrats, acted very much like Liberals in stated values and concerns, had aversion to being bound to a party

This party stinks: Self-definitions and justifications of the politically unaffiliated. Daniel M. Rempala & Bradley M. Okdie. Current Psychology, Apr 13 2022. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-022-03097-9

Abstract: Politically unaffiliated, or “independent,” voters are accorded great importance in electoral contexts because of their presumed persuadability. However, this category remains poorly defined. Using online survey data collected after the 2018 U.S. midterm elections (Study 1) and 2020 U.S. general election (Study 2), we separate political independents into distinct subcategories based on language used to describe their political beliefs and behavior, and analyze their motivations using open-ended self-justifications, the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, and political engagement measures. We identified three distinct groups of independents. Pure Independents self-identified as “independent” and lingered between the liberal and conservative poles on virtually all political engagement and moral foundations measures. Default Independents, unaffiliated participants who did not self-identify as “independent” and were low on moral foundations and political engagement measures. Fake Independents, unaffiliated participants who voted straight-ticket, provided results similar to Liberals and viewed the Democratic Party as the only voting option available. These data show the diversity of those who claim political independence and offer insights into conceptualizing political independence.