Are young voters really as Democratic as being portrayed?

[pbrower2a]

But you are dismissing the fact that people get more conservative as they get older. Case in point, McCain won the 65+ group by a greater margin than Bush.

Not so fast! People generally become less radical and more cautious with age. They tend toward the political center and not across it.

The GI Generation (born in the first quarter of the 20th Century) was generally much more liberal at all stages of life than were its predecessors, the Lost Generation born late in the 19th. I saw a pattern for the GI Generation in the D-R split and that contingent born in 1914 was one of the most Democratic-leaning age groups ever. The most conservative (Republican-leaning) were generally born in the late 1930s. Such is a huge part of the elderly, and in 2000 it wasn't yet elderly. Another set of R-leaning voters was to be found born in the early 1960s, and they have readily voted for Republican candidates since Ronald Reagan -- and they were critical to the victories of Reagan and GHWB.  They voted for Clinton when the Radical Right posed a threat to personal freedom through the imposition of superstition and sexual repression, and voted for Dubya when such seemed less threatening.  Voters born in the late 1950s were comparatively D-leaning, and still are.

Should you wish to predict that adults born after 1980 will become more conservative through some rebound effect -- perhaps. But only when they find some cause to become conservatives will they become less liberal. They will have to advance through corporate bureaucracies instead of hitting glass ceilings and falling into piked pits as is now the norm for people not born into the "right families". Their businesses will have to show strong cash flow that makes them dread high taxes more than they now dread low revenue. They will have to start enjoying the Good Life through lucrative practices in the professions. They don't do so yet. Ten years from now? Maybe. Then there might be a conservative rebound as they try to protect the political reforms of their time.

It is more likely that today's young adults will trust Big Government for cradle-to-grave health care and subsidized education and labor unions as moderators of economic harshness than give unqualified faith to corporate bureaucrats. The core values that people establish by age 20 don't change. 

[Old Man Willow]

I've always wondered why voters 30-44 tend to be so conservative.

[pbrower2a]

I've always wondered why voters 30-44 tend to be so conservative.

1. They often have children and concerns about the culture in which their children live.

2. They are jockeying for positions within bureaucracies, and at times they know well the wisdom of having a "Bush/Cheney'04" bumper sticker on the bumper even if they hate the pair. Such just might impress the Boss.

[pbrower2a]

One narrative I keep hearing is that one of the reasons the GOP is in trouble is because it is doing poorly with young people who are more supportive of the liberal agenda.

As a "young person" myself, I really don't think the GOP has "turned a generation against them" as it is commonly said. I think Republican problems in this area can largely be linked to Bush's failures and the fact that the media protected Obama for many disengaged voters. As these voters grow up they will become more politically saavy and lest reactive.

In other words I don't think that young people are exceptionally liberal, and that some of this is a function of the fact that their are more minorities in this group.

Look at the numbers. The shift between how Al Gore carried the 18-29 group in 2000. Likewise John Kerry in 2004. And with Election 2008, the performance in that group with Barack Obama.

Look to elections of the past that were Realignment Elections. And take stock of who is constantly saying we're in a center-right country: Republicans, who won the previous seven of the previous ten elections (1968-2004). It cannot be considered center-right when Democrats also laid claim to seven of the ten elections that had preceded that period (1928-1964).

If one believes in the cycular, the news is horrible for the GOP: the demographics are in place for Democrats to prevail with more than the majority of the next generation or so (beginning with Election 2008).

Add to this -- they are going to be a huge number of the elected public officials beginning about ten years from now when they are aged 28-39. 

[tallguy23]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

[Dan the Roman]

I would argue that the current High School generation is far less Democratic than they are culturally foreign to the GOP on issues like America's place in the world and gay rights. I think that while people born in the mid 80s even have something of an American greatness bias in foreign policy a simple look at the overlap in popularity in tv shows between kids aged 12-18 right now shows a much greater foreign influence. This is also widely apparent in the field of Gay rights. In my generation support for civil unions and non-discrimination was looked upon as the correct position. Now being in favor of gay marriage totally is the only correct decision. John McCain would have had enormous appeal to 18-29 year olds in 2000 who would have loved his tough-guy image, and many of whom wished they had served in the military. By 2008, many of the things that would have helped him with that group were fatal instead.

These young people are not instinctively liberal in an absolute sense. What they are however is so massively out of touch with the culture of the GOP on social issues, and its tone(rather than substance) on foreign and economic policy that I see the GOP making little or no progress unless it makes major changes. History tells us that these changes will be less substantive(an abandonment of the Christian right), than ones of emphasis. Opposing Gay rights using outdated imagery accusing them of being pedophiles, or invoking hostility will backfire. Opposing hate crimes laws on the basis they infringe personal freedom may have wider appeal.

I think that at least in the short run the GOP is in for trouble because it is has gotten into a position where its base won't let it make the tonal concessions it needs. And it does need to adjust on many of these. Some are certainly cyclical, especially on economics. Others though, like Gay rights are going to simply be bigger problems to such an extent that I think for the first time the GOP is actually losing more from these wedge issues than gaining from them.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

No, they're liberal. 

[DariusNJ]

No, they're liberal. 

Agreed. Did you guys see this Gallup poll?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives-Single-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx

It finds that voters 18-29 are as likely to be liberal (31%) as they are to be conservative (30%). Among all other age groups, people call themselves conservative by a fairly wide margin.

[Smash255]

No, they're liberal. 

Agreed. Did you guys see this Gallup poll?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives-Single-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx

It finds that voters 18-29 are as likely to be liberal (31%) as they are to be conservative (30%). Among all other age groups, people call themselves conservative by a fairly wide margin.

And I would say those that claim to be moderate in that age group tend to be quite a bit more liberal than those who claim to be moderate in other age groups.

[DariusNJ]

No, they're liberal. 

Agreed. Did you guys see this Gallup poll?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives-Single-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx

It finds that voters 18-29 are as likely to be liberal (31%) as they are to be conservative (30%). Among all other age groups, people call themselves conservative by a fairly wide margin.

And I would say those that claim to be moderate in that age group tend to be quite a bit more liberal than those who claim to be moderate in other age groups.

On issues like gay rights, yes. On abortion and stem cell research, I don't think they're much more liberal than older moderates. I know that many of them are anti-war though.

[Vepres]

No, they're liberal. 

Agreed. Did you guys see this Gallup poll?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives-Single-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx

It finds that voters 18-29 are as likely to be liberal (31%) as they are to be conservative (30%). Among all other age groups, people call themselves conservative by a fairly wide margin.

You can spin this, but all this means is that a good portion are still moderates, and the conservative numbers aren't too shabby either.

[memphis]

Young voters are much less likely to be white than older voters. This is the most important factor.

[pbrower2a]

Young voters are much less likely to be white than older voters. This is the most important factor.

They are also better educated for their age than young adults of similar age, and more rational.  They are more urban and suburban than older generations. They are far less likely than older adults to be members of the Religious Right, a constituency that fed millions of uncritical votes to the GOP .

They are likely to enter adulthood with both heavy debt (student loans) and economic insecurity and have seen story after story of executive incompetence, rapaciousness, corruption, and outright cruelty in business, so about the only thing that contemporary capitalism reliably offers is consumer choice.  Whatever their ethnicity they have less immediate stake in the usual "Sound Money" interests usually associated with the GOP.

They have yet to start getting huge incomes from professional practices, and such small businesses as they may have started have yet to become profitable enough that they concern themselves more with taxes than with revenue.   

But here's the big one: the only President that any of them can have known while adults before January 20, 2009 is George W. Bush. They did pay attention to their Civics and American history classes, and they contrast Dubya to earlier Presidents -- and he seems dreadful.

[Vepres]

Young voters are much less likely to be white than older voters. This is the most important factor.

They are also better educated for their age than young adults of similar age, and more rational.  They are more urban and suburban than older generations. They are far less likely than older adults to be members of the Religious Right, a constituency that fed millions of uncritical votes to the GOP .

They are likely to enter adulthood with both heavy debt (student loans) and economic insecurity and have seen story after story of executive incompetence, rapaciousness, corruption, and outright cruelty in business, so about the only thing that contemporary capitalism reliably offers is consumer choice.  Whatever their ethnicity they have less immediate stake in the usual "Sound Money" interests usually associated with the GOP.

They have yet to start getting huge incomes from professional practices, and such small businesses as they may have started have yet to become profitable enough that they concern themselves more with taxes than with revenue.   

But here's the big one: the only President that any of them can have known while adults before January 20, 2009 is George W. Bush. They did pay attention to their Civics and American history classes, and they contrast Dubya to earlier Presidents -- and he seems dreadful.

Of course, half the youth vote in 2012 will only know Obama. If Obama's a good President, the millenial(sp?) generation will be solid Democrat. However, if isn't successful, they could be a very independent, swing generation.

[CJK]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

[Sbane]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

I wouldn't say that young people voted for Obama over Mccain due to issues over gay rights, but it is undeniable that young people are vastly more liberal on this issue than the public at large. And the ones who are most conservative are the ones who are the oldest. So it is quite obvious that the nation will become much more liberal on this issue and fast. Republicans have to moderate on this issue, like at least supporting civil unions, or they will be looked at as bigots. There is no other way to put this.

[Smash255]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

Did people vote for Obama because of Gay marriage?  No, but their is no question the majority of young voters are in favor of Gay marriage.  That is not even remotely in dispute.  It is also true the GOP has MAJOR problems with young voters.  Granted quite a bit of it has to do with the Bush administration.  However fact of the matter is if the GOP wants even any chance of being even remotely competitive (other than hoping for a drastic collapse by the Dems) they have to moderate on this issue and especially need to cut the asinine rhetoric some throw out there (it goes against God, its an abomination, un-natural, etc)

[Mechaman]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

[CJK]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

I didn't say not to moderate anything. I said that it was unnecessary to moderate on gay marriage because it is not a priority issue to the voting public, except for religious conservatives that the Republicans need.

[Mechaman]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

I didn't say not to moderate anything. I said that it was unnecessary to moderate on gay marriage because it is not a priority issue to the voting public, except for religious conservatives that the Republicans need.

My advice? At least adopt a semi-civil union stance.
So the only people that gay marriage is a priority are religious people? LMAO
So gay people don't consider the right to be legally equal to straight people a 'priority'?

An anti-gay civil unions/marriage platform didn't help the GOP score undecided voters at the last minute, the gun issue did:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80825

[CJK]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

I didn't say not to moderate anything. I said that it was unnecessary to moderate on gay marriage because it is not a priority issue to the voting public, except for religious conservatives that the Republicans need.

My advice? At least adopt a semi-civil union stance.
So the only people that gay marriage is a priority are religious people? LMAO
So gay people don't consider the right to be legally equal to straight people a 'priority'?

An anti-gay civil unions/marriage platform didn't help the GOP score undecided voters at the last minute, the gun issue did:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80825

Right, but there aren't as many gays as there are evangelical protestants.

My point is not that gay marriage is a means to swing an election, its that flip-flopping would alienate too much of the base and would not ultimately alter voting intentions of moderates.

[Vepres]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

I didn't say not to moderate anything. I said that it was unnecessary to moderate on gay marriage because it is not a priority issue to the voting public, except for religious conservatives that the Republicans need.

My advice? At least adopt a semi-civil union stance.
So the only people that gay marriage is a priority are religious people? LMAO
So gay people don't consider the right to be legally equal to straight people a 'priority'?

An anti-gay civil unions/marriage platform didn't help the GOP score undecided voters at the last minute, the gun issue did:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80825

Right, but there aren't as many gays as there are evangelical protestants.

My point is not that gay marriage is a means to swing an election, its that flip-flopping would alienate too much of the base and would not ultimately alter voting intentions of moderates.

Gay rights and over emphasis on religious values combined with arrogant foreign policy stances alienate young people that would otherwise be GOP voters.

[Sbane]

As a member of the 18-30 aged group, I have to say that many members of my generation call themselves liberals even if they aren't. Many hold fairly conservative views but don't call themselves Republicans due to the tarnished name the party carries. I would say that my group is moderate on economics, 50-50 split on abortion, but very pro-gay rights.

One of the things I can't stand is this idea that Republicans need to moderate their position on the so called "gay rights" to appeal to young voters. There is absolutely no evidenced that many people voted for Obama because McCain opposed gay marriage. The problem is that most of our "opinion making class" (and I daresay a dispoportionate amount of political activists on the internet) come from liberal enclaves that do not share the rest of the nation's values. The ral problem is the failure of Republican governance the last eight years.

(facepalm)
Moderates are the key to victory numnuts. If you don't moderate on anything how the hell do you expect to win or even come close to winning?

I didn't say not to moderate anything. I said that it was unnecessary to moderate on gay marriage because it is not a priority issue to the voting public, except for religious conservatives that the Republicans need.

My advice? At least adopt a semi-civil union stance.
So the only people that gay marriage is a priority are religious people? LMAO
So gay people don't consider the right to be legally equal to straight people a 'priority'?

An anti-gay civil unions/marriage platform didn't help the GOP score undecided voters at the last minute, the gun issue did:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80825

Right, but there aren't as many gays as there are evangelical protestants.

My point is not that gay marriage is a means to swing an election, its that flip-flopping would alienate too much of the base and would not ultimately alter voting intentions of moderates.

You really think only gays care about marriage equality?

[Ogre Mage]

The GOP's hostility to gay rights is symptomatic of their hostility to historically discriminated groups.  In modern times the party has had bad relations with women's rights and minority organizations and they have not done well with those demographics in elections.  Their issues with gays and lesbians are in a similar vein.  It feeds the perception that whatever tokens they might shove in front of the camera, only the powers that have always been are represented there.

[Vepres]

The GOP's hostility to gay rights is symptomatic of their hostility to historically discriminated groups.  In modern times the party has had bad relations with women's rights and minority organizations and they have not done well with those demographics in elections.  Their issues with gays and lesbians are in a similar vein.  It feeds the perception that whatever tokens they might shove in front of the camera, only the powers that have always been are represented there.

I'm not saying your wrong, but it is hard to reach out to these organizations when they have practically become wings of the Democratic primary. You didn't hear any women's rights group criticizing Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal.