Individual false claims of party affinity aside, which exist within both parties (assuming a two party system): The more articulate way to put your sentiment i

Individual false claims of party affinity aside, which exist within both parties (assuming a two party system): The more articulate way to put your sentiment is that, in the end, partisan politics is about percieved correct action in the service of self-interest. On both sides. And that someone who votes for a candidate not of their party is irrationally voting against their self interest in an act of pathological empathy. At which point I'd offer that observers of this behavior are more likely to be wrong in their conclusions of the voter's motivation than the voter is to be acting irrationally. It's more likely that these anomolous voters perccieve their group's self interest to be better served, in this particular hypothetical election, by the opposing candidate. Possibly given an epiphany of strategy that others of their party don't have. For example, better IQ tends to lead to divergent perspectives rooted in more complete cognitive modeling of reality (except when it doesn't). This type of cross-isle migration may become more frequent as parties evolve in their positions.