Long ago, an elementary teacher of mine would routinely preach – "it takes two to tango." Almost always she was referring to some type of mischief or misbehavior being sought.

In today's political climate, this saying has salient relevance given the cloud of pessimism, distrust and perceived ineptness that stems from our country's two majority political party system – the Democrats and Republicans.

This increase in general voter dissatisfaction has subsequently been responsible for the cultivation of a third, and, unfortunately, sometimes dismissed constituent, the Independent, who pledges no formal allegiance to either of the two mainstream parties.

While Independents have historically been marginalized in elections, their influence in today's political landscape can be overwhelming though sometimes difficult to discern. Most recently, however, one only needs to assess the recent U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts for confirmation.

This state, once regarded as the most liberal in the union, recently elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate. It is hard to imagine that a Republican now occupies the same seat that the late Edward Kennedy occupied for almost 50 years.

But what makes this particular election so interestingly relevant is the role that Independent voters played in deciding the outcome. Recent analysis shows Massachusetts had significantly more residents identifying as political Independents (49 percent) than as Democrats (35 percent).

This partisan breakdown is eye opening to say the least, but what spurred this Independent identification? Was it a referendum on the current administration's policies? Could it be solely a result of the high national unemployment rate? Was it a result of our country's continued political polarization?

Whatever the reason, the phenomenon should not be ignored. Further evidence of Independent voters bucking the reigning party rule also include Virginia voting in Republican Governor Bob McDonnell and New Jersey voters electing Republican Governor Chris Christie. Both of these states have historically been considered "blue dog Democrat" strongholds.

The ideologue pundits will say that this dynamic personifies a swinging political pendulum from one party to the next; and consistent with the natural order of an administration's cycle as it runs its course. Paying closer attention will tell you that the conventional two-party paradigm that constituents know so well is evolving. Independent investigation says there are more "policy and not party" voters that are ostensibly changing the scenery.

Perhaps the traditional tango as we know it may not be as apropos as it once was. Seemingly we're seeing the evidence that we may need to make room for another electorate dance partner who is realizing that when it comes to political monopoly, it takes three to shake things up and start a rumble.