New Conservative Young Generation?

[hopper]

I've seen myself learning more towards the Republicans, mainly due to the Democratic Party's left-wing shift over the past 15-years.

The Democratic Party hasn't shifted left. It just lost its conservative wing.

The Republican Party, on the other hand, as shifted far, far to the right.

Sure Republicans have shifted to the right but not far right as you think. Yes the Dems lost their Conservative Wing. Per DW-Nominate the average Republican Score is +0.488. The Average Dem Score is somewhere near the -0.400 mark.

[hopper]

I've seen myself learning more towards the Republicans, mainly due to the Democratic Party's left-wing shift over the past 15-years.

The Democratic Party hasn't shifted left. It just lost its conservative wing.

The Republican Party, on the other hand, as shifted far, far to the right.

If the Republicans have shifted far to the right, then it seems that it's just a realisation that the world is changing. The party is more receptive to pension reform, education privatisation, and deregulation, all of which are needed to remain competitive in a sea of demographic changes and globalisation.

If the Democrats possessed a more centrist wing, then I would wholeheartedly vote for them, as I dislike the social conservatism of the Republicans.

Most of the classmates I talk to also share these viewpoints, with the poor labour market, anaemic economic performance, and high college costs shifting them to a position where they tolerate the relative bigotry of some members of the Republican Party.

Bernie addresses those concerns much better than the Republican party. Of course if Hillary is the nominee, the Democratic party can say goodbye to a lot of young voters.

Young Voters like Hillary. The only 3 Republicans that can cobble together 270 Electoral Votes are Rubio, Jeb, and Kasich.

[hopper]

There is some evidence that voters born since 1992 are actually a Republican-leaning group.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/03/10/democrats-have-a-young-people-problem-too/

Actually No. Here is a sample of party ID of 1992+ Born per Pew Research that I looked up:

Dem Advantage(+)

1992: D+23
1993: D+12
1994: D+6
1995  D+9
1996: D+ 17

[hopper]

Young people are actually less likely to be Democrats than old people. But they're much less less likely to be Republican and much more likely to be Independents.

I like how the""Linear Line" factor of the number of Indies(without taking into accounts
"leaners") goes down by age and the number of Republicans goes up by percentage by age. The number of Dems by age just stays steady basically throughout the chart.

[hopper]

There is some evidence that voters born since 1992 are actually a Republican-leaning group.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/03/10/democrats-have-a-young-people-problem-too/

Actually No. Here is a sample of party ID of 1992+ Born per Pew Research that I looked up:

Dem Advantage(+)

1992: D+23
1993: D+12
1994: D+6
1995  D+9
1996: D+ 17

I wonder why those born in '94 are 17 points less Democratic than those born 2 years earlier?

Indeed.  The more interesting question is why the kids born in 1996 are 11 points more Democratic-voting than kids born in 1994.  Perhaps they are just more socially progressive, or maybe simply a matter of noisy data.

Probably just noisy data, depending on when exactly it was taken.  The youth vote will be fascinating to watch in 2016.

Pew Research had another stat line called the "3 Year Rolling Average" as opposed to the "Individual Birth Year". The "3 Year Rolling Average" for 1994 Birth Year Party ID is D+11 as opposed to the Individual Birth Year Party ID of D+6. The 1992 Individual Birth Year is D+23 but gets knocked down to D+17 for the "3 Year Rolling Average".

[hopper]

The only element of uniformity in my age groups is the complete opposition to air strikes in the Middle east, partly because at least in the UK we've been raised with Iraq and Afghanistan, followed by Libya. I've spoken to devout Thatcherites who oppose the air strikes.

Is that so? A lot of the people I know between 19-25 are in favour. What I tend to find though is that there is a weird anti airstrike coalition between the hard left and the hard right, both tending to be more likely to oppose, with an odd mish-mash of Progress types and Cameroons being fervently supporting.

Or maybe my social circle is just weird. That could be true too.

Your friends are probably in the "Civil-Libertarian Wing" of the Republican Party like the Rand Paul and Justin Amash types.

[hopper]

Young people are actually less likely to be Democrats than old people. But they're much less less likely to be Republican and much more likely to be Independents.

This is largely just young people being edgy, ignorant, and all "but the system is corrupt, maaaaan", "both parties are equally as bad", etc etc. They've also come of age during an era where government largely doesn't work: a crisis of confidence. There was a spike in independent affiliation during the 1960s and 1970s that has continued to the present day, but it's doubtful that an entire generation is going to remain so "independent" as they age. The % of independents in this country is only a few percentage points higher today than it was during the 1970s - fueled disproportionately by the youngs at the time - yet most of those olds have all now affiliated themselves with a party.

Also, the Millennial voting bloc is growing at a phenomenal rate between each election. It was 15% in 2008, 20% in 2012 and forecast to be 25% in 2016. One in five Millennials that voted in 2012 could stay home and our share of the electorate would still be as large as it was in 2012 (and still majority-Democratic).

The 1970's-well because of Watergate a lot of "Solid Republicans" became Independents or Independent-Leaning Republicans. They came back to be "Solid Republicans"  with Reagan in 1980 I believe.