National and Utah Statewide Party Affiliations

During 2019, a Gallup poll based on interviews of 29,525 likely voter adults found that 30 percent of Americans identified as Democrats, 28 percent as Republicans and 41 percent as independent (Jones (⊕2020Jones, Jeffrey M. 2020. “U.S. Party Preferences Steady During Trump Era.” Washington, D.C. https://news.gallup.com/poll/274694/party-preferences-steady-during-trump-era.aspx.)). Gallup did not separate the independent category into unaffiliated and other minor party subcategories. Table 1 shows analogous Utah party identifications.

Table 1. Count of Registered Voters by Party Affiliation for Utah Statewide and within Salt Lake City Municipal Limits

Item	Unaffiliated	Democratic	Republican	Others
Salt Lake City	38541	32334	17421	4758
Salt Lake City Percent	41	35	19	5
Utah	508131	190135	675205	78747
Utah Percent	35	13	46	5

Note: For Salt Lake City, 93054 Active Registered voters in 121 of 126 Precincts on January 10, 2020. For Statewide 1452218 Registered Voters in 29 Counties on December 31, 2019. Tables Addendum A1, Part 1, and Addendum A1, Part 2, list Salt Lake City precinct level detail for this summary. Source: Salt Lake County Clerk (⊕2020Salt Lake County Clerk. 2020. “Salt Lake City Precincts - Voters Registered in All Parties , File: SLC Precincts - Voters Registered in All Parties (as of Jan 19 2020).xls in author’s possession.” Salt Lake City, Utah: Salt Lake County Clerk’s Office.), Utah Lt. Governor Office (2019).

Utah statewide voters are different from voters nationally. At 46 percent, the Republican Party is Utah’s largest political affiliation among registered voters. Nationally, unaffiliated and other minor parties (independent voters) comprise 41 percent of registered voters, and such unaffiliated and independent voters are the largest national political “party” of affiliated voters - but still smaller than non-voters (Jones (2020)).

At 807,782 non-voting “affiliates”, Utah’s non-voters are its largest political “party” as a percent of the adult population (35 percent). In Utah, 40 percent (30+5) of registered voters are unaffiliated or are affiliated with a minor independent party. Thirty-five percent are unaffiliated voters. Republican affiliated voters are the second largest party at an estimated 30 percent of the adult population (0.46 times 0.64), followed by unaffiliated registered voters at an estimated 22 percent (0.35 times 0.64) of the adult population. Registered Democrats comprise an estimated 8 percent (0.13 times 0.64) of the state’s adult population.

Even with its 46 percent share of Utah registered voters and 30 percent affiliated share of Utah’s adult population, the Utah Republican Party cannot exercise majority political power without attracting a portion of unaffiliated registered voters.

Salt Lake City affiliated voters have a more similar distribution to national party affiliations than to Utah’s statewide registered voter population. Within Salt Lake City, the percent of registered Republicans (19 percent) and Democrats (35 percent) are reversed as compared to statewide averages.

Statewide Political Party Affiliations at the County Level

From the state-wide Utah level down to the Salt Lake County level, the distribution of Unaffiliated, Democrat Republican and Other Party Affiliations are similar to statewide averages. Figures 1 and 2 (at the beginning of this report) graphically show the statewide distribution of Republican voters by percent of all registered voters. Table 3 presents that distribution numerically.

Table 2 - Summary of Distribution of Utah Political Parties by County - Percent

County Name	County Total	Unaffiliated	Democrat	Republican	Other
Salt Lake	611837	40	21	34	4
Utah	330754	32	7	56	4
Davis	193619	35	10	51	4
Weber	129783	38	14	43	5
Washington	100805	26	10	59	6
Cache	65485	33	9	54	5
Tooele	34365	40	10	44	5
Box Elder	30721	33	5	58	4
Iron	29565	26	8	61	5
Summit	28925	40	23	32	5
Wasatch	19147	31	14	51	4
Uintah	18077	22	5	69	4
Sanpete	13822	27	6	63	5
Carbon	11719	38	18	39	5
Sevier	11629	26	4	67	2
Duchesne	9399	19	6	72	4
San Juan	8601	37	24	36	3
Morgan	7324	33	5	59	3
Millard	6803	24	4	69	3
Juab	6678	31	6	60	3
Emery	6668	38	5	55	2
Grand	5912	41	20	34	4
Kane	4670	22	11	64	3
Beaver	3510	25	7	65	2
Garfield	3119	22	8	67	2
Wayne	1808	23	9	65	1
Rich	1395	16	3	78	2
Piute	1004	16	3	79	1
Daggett	727	23	7	68	2
All	1697871	35	14	46	4

Note: For Utah and 29 Counties - Active and Inactive Registered voters on January 20, 2020. The Lt. Governor’s Office could not provide disaggregated active and inactive voter data at the level county. Addendum Tables A2 and A3 list detailed information for all parties, including the Other category, e.g. - Constitution, Green, and Libertarian parties. Source: Utah Lt. Governor’s Office (2020).

Salt Lake County is the least Republican Party affiliated of the heavily populated counties. As noted above, within Salt Lake County (34 percent), Salt Lake City has an even lower ratio of Republican affiliated voters (19 percent)

During Utah’s 2016 Presidential Election with Deep Ideological Divisions

• Based on statewide registered voters and ballot counts

Utah’s 2016 presidential election voting provides an illustrative example. Table 3 summarizes Utah active statewide registered voters on November 7, 2016 (Utah Lt. Governor 2016). Table 4 summarizes the Utah 2016 presidential election’s outcome.

Table 3 - Distribution of Utah Registered Voters by Political Affiliation - 2016

Item	Unaffiliated	Democrat	Republican	Constitution	Independent	Libertarian	Total
Count	529810	160384	677026	4873	21537	11728	1405358
Percent	37.7	11.4	48.2	0.3	1.5	0.8	100
Scaled to Statewide Turnout	426518	129116	545033	3923	17338	9442	1131370

Note: Active Utah Registered Voters on October 7, 2016. Scaled to 1,113,370 actual voters shown in Table 4. Source: Utah Lt. Governor’s Office (Nov. 8, 2016).

Table 4 - Outcome of Utah’s 2016 Presidential Election. Source: Wikipedia (2020)

Item	Trump	Clinton	McMullin	Others	Total
Count	515231	310676	243690	61773	1131370
Percent	45.5	27.5	21.5	5.5	100

Using reasoning to assign voters to candidates, rough estimates of the transition probabilities for the important unaffiliated voting group can be inferred. All conservative groups (3,923+17,338+9,442=30,703 voters in Table 3) most likely voted for the conservative McMullin. Democratic voters split between Clinton and the more progressive candidate Stein in the “Other” ballot group (61,733 voters). Republicans supported candidate Trump. Unaffiliated voters split between Trump, Clinton, and McMullin. In Table 5, voters are arbitrarily allocated to various candidates based on the foregoing guidelines.

Table 5 - Arbitrary Transitions by Scaled Utah Registered Voters to Candidates - 2016 Presidential Election. Note: See Table 3 for scaling of voter counts.

Party	Trump	Clinton	McMullin	Others	Total
Unaffiliated	0	181560	183185	61733	426478
Democrat	0	129116	0	0	129116
Republican	515231	0	29802	0	545033
Constitution	0	0	3923	0	3923
Independent	0	0	17338	0	17338
Libertarian	0	0	9442	0	9442
Total	515231	310676	243690	61733	1131330

This arbitrary attribution is reasonable because for the 2016 Presidential election, rational choice of voting theory failed.⊕Rational choice of voting means that it is assumed that people vote based on what they perceive to be in their individual best interest. A variation of rational choice voting is low-information voting. Low-information voting means that voters select a candidate based on limited available information. Low-information voting theory is sometimes used to explain seemingly irrational choices made by voters. A core prediction of rational choice of voting theory is that candidates will moderate their positions towards the center, in order to maximize their capture of potential voters. On the date of the 2016 election, both candidates had not moderated their positions towards the center. Severe political and cultural divisions still existed between voters by party affiliation. Table 6 converts the 2016 Utah vote counts in Table 5 to percentages.

Table 6 - Estimated Party Affiliation Transition Probabilities - 2016 Presidential Election

Party Affiliation	Trump	Clinton	McMullin	Others	Row Total
Unaffiliated	0	43	43	14	100
Democrat	0	100	0	0	100
Republican	95	0	5	0	100
Constitution	0	0	100	0	100
Independent	0	0	100	0	100
Libertarian	0	0	100	0	100

The rough transition probability estimates in Table 6 suggest that Utah’s unaffiliated voters split their votes equally between the Democrat and Republican parties.

• Based on the Emerson College October 31, 2016 Utah Poll

That Utah’s unaffiliated voters split their allegiance equally between Democrats and Republicans is also suggested by pre-election transition probabilities revealed in a poll taken shortly before 2016 voting. On October 31, 2016, the week before the November 7 election, Emerson College (Emerson College and Emerson Polling (⊕2016Emerson College, and Emerson Polling. 2016. “Emerson College Final U.S. Presidential Election, Final Poll, Oct. 31, 2016, Utah File: ECP_UT_11.xls, file in author’s possession recv’d Nov. 8, 2016.” http://emersonpolling.com/.)) surveyed voter presidential preferences for 80,000 likely American voters, including 1,000 Utah likely voters. Tables 7 (by count) and 8 (by percent) summarizes the Emerson College poll results for Utah.

Table 7. Transition Counts from Party Affiliations to 2016 Utah Presidential Candidates. Note: N=1000. Source: Emerson College 2016.

Party Affiliation	Trump	Clinton	McMullin	Johnson	Stein	Unsure	Total
Independent	84	83	118	21	18	36	360
Democrat	7	82	6	2	3	9	110
Republican	307	30	152	7	0	34	530
Total	398	196	276	30	22	79	1000

Table 8. Transition Probabilities from Party Affiliations to 2016 Utah Presidential Candidates. Note: N=1000. Source: Emerson College 2016. Columns may not add to 1,000 due to rounding.

Party Affiliation	Trump	Clinton	McMullin	Johnson	Stein	Unsure	Total
Independent	23	23	33	6	5	10	100
Democrat	6	75	5	2	3	8	100
Republican	58	6	29	1	0	6	100
Total	40	20	28	3	2	8	100

The Emerson poll data has weaknesses. In Table 7, there are an insufficient number of Republican and Democrat transition counts for minor parties McMullin, Johnson, and Stein to attribute statistical significance to the related transition probabilities seen in Table 8. However, for the Independent (unaffiliated plus smaller parties) in Table 7, there are a sufficient number of observations, and the same pattern is seen as in Table 8 as in the prior exploration in Table 6: Independent, that is unaffiliated voters, equally split (23-23) between the Republican and Democratic candidates.

During Salt Lake City’s Non-Partisan 2019 Mayoral Election

In the 2019 non-partisan Salt Lake City mayoral election, Salt Lake City’s atypical distribution of party affiliations did not show partisan transition probabilities similar to the statewide ideological 2016 Utah presidential election. Unlike the 2016 Utah presidential election, this local non-partisan mayoral race featured two candidates with virtually indistinguishable positions. Before Election Day, the candidates moderated their positions to a common point as predicted by rational voter choice theory.

On October 25, 2019 and twelve days before the November 5th election, Utah Policy.com published a Y2K Analytics poll from which political party affiliation transitions probabilities can be derived (Schott (⊕2019Schott, Bryan. 2019. “Mendenhall Leads Escamilla by 13-Points in Salt Lake City Mayor Race.” Salt Lake City, Utah. https://utahpolicy.com/index.php/features/today-at-utah-policy/21987-mendenhall-leads-escamilla-by-13-points-in-salt-lake-city-mayor-race.)). The actual poll study was not published; only a summary of the poll was published by Utah Policy - a practice that is inconsistent with the prevailing industry standard in the Code of Ethics and Standards of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). The AAPOR Standards require publication of the underlying study 30 days after first public disclosure (American Association for Public Opinion Research (⊕2015American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2015. “Code of Professional Ethics and Practices.” Terrace, Illinois: American Association for Public Opinion Research. https://www.aapor.org/Standards-Ethics/AAPOR-Code-of-Ethics/AAPOR{_}Code{_}Accepted{_}Version{_}11302015.aspx.)). Table 9 lists transition probabilities by political affiliation from the Y2K survey of 925 likely Salt Lake City voters. The term Independent as used in the Y2K poll refers to both unaffiliated voters and minor political parties such as the Constitution, American Independent, United Utah and Green parties.

Table 9. Transition Probabilities from Party Affiliations to 2019 Mayoral Candidates

Party Affiliation	Mendenhall	Escamilla	Undecided	Unaccounted
Independent Lean Republican	50	23	27	0
Independent	40	29	28	3
Independent Lean Democrat	42	36	22	0
Republican Strong	45	38	14	3
Republican Moderate	47	35	18	0
Democrat Strong	54	32	14	0
Democrat Moderate	39	36	25	0
Mean - All	45	33	21	1
Mean Independents	44	29	26	1
Mean Republican	46	36	16	2
Mean Democrat	46	34	19	0

Note: Unaccounted means that the Utah Policy.com reports of Y2K transition probabilities do not sum to 100 percent. Source: Schott (2019).

Pairwise statistical significance testing⊕This author has previously written going back to 2016 regarding Utah Policy.com’s and Y2K’s failure to comply with the AAPOR standard. Y2K Analytics does not indicate on their website that the organization is a member of the AAPOR, nor does Utah Policy.com indicate on their website that their organization or publishers are members of the Society of Professional Journalists bound by the truth and accuracy requirements of the SPJ Code of Ethics. Subject to these continuing qualifications on the reliabilty of Y2K and Utah Policy.com poll reporting, the Y2K data is used in the present analysis. As illustrated here, the continuing disclosure failure prevents full analysis of 2019 mayoral party affiliation behavior. was not possible on the Y2K poll proportions because the number of respondents within each political affiliation were not reported by Utah Policy.com and Y2K did not publish its study. Visually examining Table 9, there appears to be no indication of any effect on voting behavior by any political affiliation with two exceptions. Independents (unaffiliated) that lean towards voting as Republicans have a slightly elevated preference for candidate Mendenhall; the same occurs for Strong Democrats. But again, whether these are statistically significant differences cannot be tested based on available published information. The overall impression from Table 9 is that political partisanship was not a factor in the election. No strong pattern of party affiliation preference for either candidate is evident, and Salt Lake City municipal voters cast their ballots in a non-partisan manner.

Transition probabilities in Salt Lake City’s 2019 mayoral election are an example that illustrates that Utah unaffiliated voter behavior is not monolithic. Where strong ideological and controversial cultural questions are absent, this sub-sample of Utah unaffiliated voters did not favor a particular candidate when choosing between two candidates with similar positions.