Young Voter Trends: Can We Predict the Future?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:24:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Young Voter Trends: Can We Predict the Future?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Young Voter Trends: Can We Predict the Future?  (Read 7619 times)
Hillary 2016
Marienne Boudreau
Rookie
**
Posts: 57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 01, 2009, 02:22:15 AM »

The youngest voters from 2004-2008

State       2004 Margin      2008 Margin            Swing

The Mid-Atlantic

PA            60-39 Kerry       66-34 Obama              D + 6
DE           54-45 Kerry        71-25 Obama        D + 17
NY           72-25 Kerry         76-21 Obama       D + 4
NJ            64-35 Kerry        67-32 Obama           D + 3
MD       62-35 Kerry       70-26 Obama      D + 8
DC           90-8 Kerry       95-5 Obama       D + 5

New England

CT            70-29 Kerry       79-18 Obama      D + 9
ME          50-48 Bush       67-30 Obama      D + 19
NH           57-43 Kerry       61-37 Obama      D + 4
VT           71-27 Kerry       81-18 Obama      D + 10
MA          72-26 Kerry       78-20 Obama      D + 6
RI            68-30 Kerry       68-25 Obama      D + 0

The Midwest

OH           56-42 Kerry       61-38 Obama              D + 5
IN            52-47 Bush        63-35 Obama              D + 16
MO           51-48 Kerry        59-39 Obama             D + 8
IA              53-46 Kerry        63-34 Obama            D + 10
MI             55-43 Kerry         68-29 Obama            D + 13
MN           57-41 Kerry         66-32 Obama            D + 9
WI            57-41 Kerry         64-35 Obama            D + 7
IL             64-35 Kerry        71-27 Obama    D + 7

The Coastal South

VA            54-46 Kerry       63-34 Obama              D + 9
NC            56-43 Kerry       74-26 Obama              D + 18
SC            51-48 Bush        57-42 Obama             D + 9
GA            52-47 Bush        51-48 McCain             D + 1
FL             58-41 Kerry        61-37 Obama             D + 3

The Deep and Inland South

AL            57-41 Bush         51-49 Obama           D + 10
MS           63-37 Kerry         56-43 Obama           R + 6
TN            53-46 Bush         59-40 Obama           D + 13
KY           54-45 Bush          51-48 Obama           D + 6
WV          52-48 Bush         50-50 Tie      D + 2
AR           51-47 Bush         49-49 Tie      D + 2
LA            53-45 Bush         49-48 McCain   D + 4 (but won 18-24 by 53-45)
TX       59-41 Bush         54-45 Obama   D + 13

The Plains States

KS           55-44 Bush          51-47 Obama   D + 7
ND           68-32 Bush         51-47 Obama   D + 19
SD           55-43 Bush         50-48 Obama   D + 7
NE           60-38 Bush         54-43 Obama   D + 16
OK           62-38 Bush         60-40 McCain   D + 2

The Rockies and the Southwest

AZ           50-48 Bush        52-48 Obama   D + 4
NV            56-42 Kerry        70-29 Obama           D + 14
NM           50-49 Bush         77-21 Obama           D + 27
CO           51-47 Kerry         No result                  N/A
UT            77-18 Bush         62-33 McCain           D + 15
WY          72-25 Bush         63-35 McCain   D + 10
MT      52-43 Bush        61-37 Obama   D + 18
ID            65-35 Bush        56-42 McCain   D + 7

The West

CA           58-39 Kerry         76-23 Obama   D + 18 (80% of 18-24 for Obama)
OR           62-37 Kerry          No result      N/A
WA          50-47 Kerry          No result      N/A
AK           59-37 Bush         61-37 Bush      R + 2
HI             61-39 Kerry         82-18 Obama   D + 21

Findings:

For some very strange reason, the exit polls show that in Mississippi, young voters became more Republican.  This doesn't make sense since Obama was able to still win young voters, but Kerry, the northeastern "elitist liberal", actually won 63% of these voters.  I had asked a young, black college professor from MS about that and she said the 63% could be because of a number of reasons: (1) young voters in Mississippi opposed the Iraq War on religious grounds, (2) young voters in Mississippi are much more mixed racially than the older generation which is whiter, (3) even in Mississippi, young voters are more progressive.

I'm guessing that Colorado had something similar to most of the other states, which was a 60+ majority for Barack.

Barack Obama would have lost Indiana and North Carolina without 18-24 voters.

North Carolina and Georgia are going to be VERY different states in the future.

Take a look at that swing in North Carolina - 74% of all voters 18-29 in North Carolina supported Barack.

So if you make believe 18-29 year olds made up all of the electorate, you would have had the media call 2004 a huge Democratic landslide, and 2008 would have been an absolute blowout.

Even the states that Bush would have won would have been by much weaker majorities that dwarf in comparison to his big wins in the 2004 red states (for example, ruby red Kansas, a state that went for Bush with 62% would have only gone to him by 55%).  In 2008, Kansas would have become a blue state.

The 2008 election would have been a DISASTER for John McCain.  He would have even lost his home state of Arizona by 4 points (and 18-24 year olds in AZ by 20 points).

And this is big: TEXAS, the mother of red states, goes bright blue.

Based on this, we can try to predict what the new realignment will be in the future if these voters continue this pattern.  Remember, voting twice or three times for the same party makes you more likely to keep voting that way.  Look at what the late 70s and 80s did for the young people - they saw Ronald Reagan and the Republicans as stronger and today they vote Republican in large numbers.

The Bluest States in 2008 for .young voters were: North Carolina (74% Democratic), Massachusetts (78% Dem), New York (76% Dem), Connecticut (79% Dem), New Mexico (77% Dem), California (76% Dem), Nevada (70% Dem), Maryland (70%), Delaware (71%), Illinois (71%), and perhaps Washington, Oregon, and Colorado.

Then you had a lot of really blue states but in the 60s range: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Virginia, Florida, Montana, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota.

Unfortunately I don't know how to post a map...I still don't understand how you all do the red-blue switch, it's so confusing!!!  I know the creator of this forum remembers 1984's sea of Reagan blue, but all I can remember is that sea of Bush red in 2004.

ANYWAY, Lets discuss how all this makes a difference, or does it?  Will these Obama supermajorities change the electoral map of the 2020's, 30's, and 40's?  Will there be another voter realignment, with states like Oklahoma and Utah being very out of touch with the rest of the country?!?
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2009, 09:56:34 AM »
« Edited: August 10, 2009, 10:07:13 AM by pbrower2a »



Findings:

For some very strange reason, the exit polls show that in Mississippi, young voters became more Republican.  This doesn't make sense since Obama was able to still win young voters, but Kerry, the northeastern "elitist liberal", actually won 63% of these voters.  I had asked a young, black college professor from MS about that and she said the 63% could be because of a number of reasons: (1) young voters in Mississippi opposed the Iraq War on religious grounds, (2) young voters in Mississippi are much more mixed racially than the older generation which is whiter, (3) even in Mississippi, young voters are more progressive.



re: Mississippi

It could be that

(1) Obama is black, and white Mississippians are not accustomed to voting for blacks for any office. Mississippi politics are really scummy irrespective of ethnicity, and Obama looks like the sort of leader that white Mississippians associate with black-majority places in Mississippi in which white politicians have no chance to win. Machine politics are the norm in Mississippi, even in rural counties. (White machine politicians are no better).  Kerry is white.

(2) John McCain has ancestral ties to Mississippi.

(3) Mississippi's response to Hurricane Katrina -- much in contrast to that of Louisiana -- really was competent, and Dubya co-operated well with its reconstruction, at least with white Republicans.

(4) If Mississippians would elect politicians on merit instead of on identity-group politics, they would end up with lesser polarization, better government, and lesser corruption. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which illustrates the tendency.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Georgia has much more of a military presence. White youth drawn into the military are much more politically-conservative and more rural than suburban. Such might be part of the difference. But add to that, Georgia is split between its north (largely Greater Atlanta and such a college town as Athens) and the more rural South Georgia. I figure that northern Georgia votes much like North Carolina -- but southern Georgia is Deep South -- really deep. North Carolina and Greater Atlanta have attracted many Northern economic migrants -- but southern Georgia has attracted neither the economic migrants nor the winter-evaders who go farther south to Florida. Northern Georgia is much like North Carolina; southern Georgia might as well be Mississippi or Alabama.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's important to remember that the 18-24-year-olds of 2004 became the 22-to-28-year-olds of 2008. Voting habits may change with age, and all birth-year cohorts seem to become less liberal on drugs, sex, crime, family life, with age...  with the exceptions of gays and lesbians, most have children. But although people with children become more conservative about culture, especially as their children become adolescents, they might not become more 'conservative' on economics and ethnicity. If associated with labor unions they tend to become more liberal on economics. Note also that if they are deferring children until the economy improves then they may be slower to go conservative even on cultural issues.

Core personalities and values do not change with time. Peo-ple do not become more trusting of entrenched elites and less trustful of ethnic minorities with time.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another way of looking at it: the GOP coalition of corporate exploiters and fundamentalist preachers has little to offer current youth. That coalition has created the sort of society in which the most reliable attribute of success is to be born into the Right Family. All others not so fortunately-born face glass ceilings if they have talent and piked pits if they falter or even run into some misfortune (like a mass layoff).  That is how old-fashioned aristocratic societies work in economics and in religious culture: they offer goodies for the well-connected in This World, pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die for those who accept their lot (including poverty and subjection in This World), and a contempt for rational thought. The GOP differs from old-fashioned aristocracies (and fascist dictatorships that use Bolshevik terror to preserve and promote the interests of rapacious elites) only in failing to revive the brutal punishments once certain for anyone who showed any tendency toward rebellion or dissent.

People now in their thirties and forties blame themselves for their lot (I didn't get enough or the right sort of education, I didn't take the pay cut to move to Alabama) and complain; people in their teens and twenties don't blame themselves. They see a system that works only for a few.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If anything, Generation X has shown some erosion in GOP support because it has endured the mass layoffs, two-tier wage scales, and tax shifts from the rich to the non-rich -- and of course, the sockdolager of discreditation of the GOP -- the subprime mortgage meltdown.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It will revolutionize American politics -- but slowly. The young Obama voters are likely to be much more liberal than anyone older, and although voters who follow them might be less liberal on economic issues (people born after about 2005 will have no memory of George W. Botch as an active politician)... those youth will have become many of the elected public officials who make the big decision, the clergy who preach (they will be more like Billy Graham or Fulton Sheen than like John Hagee or Rod Parsley -- more rational if still orthodox in theology), the teachers in schools, the journalists of the contemporary media, the creators of mass culture, and of course the union officials. They may become somewhat more conservative with time as they finally have a stake in the system as business executives, owners of profitable small businesses, and holders of lucrative professions -- and have children in adolescence -- but much less conservative than their elders and probably their juniors. 

Maybe they will define what the conservatism of the time is -- more in family life and culture than as we see it in economics today. Conservatism circa 2040-2050 may mean the preservation of something good instead of an attempt to fit people into a world of economic and institutional nastiness on behalf of the "Right People" whose indulgence and pampering is the objective of a well-ordered society (as around 2000-2005 under GOP majorities).

An eighty-year-rule seems to apply to American history. I look at George W. Bush and I see the weak leadership of America in the 1920s, 1850s, and 1760s -- leadership that lacked the will to say no to rapacious elites and whose economic pandering to those elites created economic bubbles that blew up and left people extremely dissatisfied. American Revolution -- Civil War -- World War II -- and whatever happens in the 2010s ... all spaced by a long human lifetime, the time that it takes for memories to vanish through deaths.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2009, 11:08:02 AM »
« Edited: August 01, 2009, 11:11:02 AM by pbrower2a »

The best way to create a map is to modify an existing one, for example my own map of how the most recent approval polls have gone:



Green implies that on the whole the most recent poll for Obama was positive, yellow indicated that it was negative, and the alternative of white indicated an exact tie. 

On Leip's maps the convention is to use the old  "red=Democratic, blue=Republican" habit with green, yellow, and orange for third, fourth, and fifth Parties should they win anything. Lighter shades indicate a weaker tendency and darker shades indicate a stronger tendency.  Gray suggests either the absence of data and white might indicate an exact tie (exact ties are rare) or non-existence.

So I will turn all states "gray" as a blank map:




I can put your data onto a map for the 2008 margin:


2008 Voting margin, youngest voters:





For Obama : increasing shades of red if known
Not known: use increasing shades of green  (Obama won these).
Tie: yellowish off-white
For McCain: increasing shades of blue

(I am not distinguishing congressional districts in Maine or Nebraska, so those go gray)

 

Logged
Hillary 2016
Marienne Boudreau
Rookie
**
Posts: 57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2009, 03:18:10 PM »

First of all, thank you for this map!  I still don't know how to put that map in the messages, is there a button you press to make a map appear?

I read through your entire analysis and I agree with it all, and I also am very fascinated by your discussion about the rapacious elites and the pandering to them that caused those decades where the people in power were stooges for the special interests - the 1760s, the 1850s, and the 1920s, and now 2001-2007 - and I realize that after all of these decades there seems to be a major upheaval - the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Great Depression - are we experiencing that upheaval with the Great Recession or is there something coming in the 2010s?  I mean, we did make history by electing Barack Obama, an upheaval of sorts in itself, right?

Something tells me the 2010's will not be much different than now, maybe some new inventions in technology, adding onto the Googles and the Facebooks and the Twitters and the Blackberrys and the iPods, but I just don't see any sort of innovation in the other areas of life, like transportation, medicine, and major breakthroughs in science.

 I also don't see any dramatic changes in the culture.  Fashion has remained the same - very boring, very conservative - aside from the emos and the "Starbucks hipster/indie look", was there really any kind of counterculture in this generation?  Our celebrity culture has gotten even more ridiculous.

I also want to ask another question: Does the culture emulate the President in power?

And p.s. - Why can't I type a lot on this thing without it going crazy if I type too much?  I have to type things in WordPad and then paste it in.  Can the site manager please fix this?
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2009, 06:32:51 PM »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

By the way, in 1984 you could have said that New York and Maryland were changing states and that the Democrats were in trouble. Trends rarely remain steady.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2009, 06:40:04 PM »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

By the way, in 1984 you could have said that New York and Maryland were changing states and that the Democrats were in trouble. Trends rarely remain steady.
They'll also remember Bush pretty well. Chances are Obama will be viewed in a much favorable light than Bush...
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2009, 12:36:29 AM »

The GOP has put themselves in a pretty deep whole as they pretty much have completely alianated younger voters.  Now will they lose the young vote in the future by what they lost it in 08?  Perhaps not, but they still have a long way to go.

As far as Mississippi and the differences between 04 and 08 go.  Keep in mind that not all polls are perfect.  You will generally have 1 poll out of 20 which is outside the MOE.  So when you have a set of 50 exit polls, you will likely have 2 or 3 polls which are off by a bit.  This appears to be the case in Mississippi in 04, and Maine as well
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2009, 02:59:53 AM »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

After Dubya, whom they will know and revile, they won't expect perfection from Obama. The youngest voters of 2012 will have been born in 1994; they will remember 9/11, which happened when they were almost seven at the youngest. They will remember the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  They will remember the grandiose stunt of the President fling a naval aircraft onto an aircraft carrier to a banner reading "Mission Accomplished" only to find out later that the war continued in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course they will remember the subprime lending scam and real estate bubble coming to a bad end.  Many will have recognized as young as age 14 that Sarah Palin was a political disaster.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. One blowout landslide election proves nothing; four years after LBJ trounced Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon won election as President. Four years after Nixon trounced McGovern, Nixon's successor lost a close election to Jimmy Carter.  Such indicates the strength of the two-Party system and the relative parity of the Parties.

All that I can say about the current trend in politics is that with the coalition that it now has, the Republican Party is doomed to lose one election after another until it finds a new coalition, one based on something other than a combination of plutocrats, corporate bureaucrats, and theocrats.  
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2009, 11:11:45 AM »



Findings:

For some very strange reason, the exit polls show that in Mississippi, young voters became more Republican.  This doesn't make sense since Obama was able to still win young voters, but Kerry, the northeastern "elitist liberal", actually won 63% of these voters.  I had asked a young, black college professor from MS about that and she said the 63% could be because of a number of reasons: (1) young voters in Mississippi opposed the Iraq War on religious grounds, (2) young voters in Mississippi are much more mixed racially than the older generation which is whiter, (3) even in Mississippi, young voters are more progressive.



re: Mississippi

It could be that

(1) Obama is black, and white Mississippians are not accustomed to voting for blacks for any office. Mississippi politics are really scummy irrespective of ethnicity, and Obama looks like the sort of leader that white Mississippians associates with black-majority places in Mississippi in which white politicians have no chance to win. Machine politics are the norm in Mississippi, even in rural counties. (White machine politicians are no better).  Kerry is white.




As far as Mississippi and the differences between 04 and 08 go.  Keep in mind that not all polls are perfect.  You will generally have 1 poll out of 20 which is outside the MOE.  So when you have a set of 50 exit polls, you will likely have 2 or 3 polls which are off by a bit.  This appears to be the case in Mississippi in 04, and Maine as well

Smash's post is more likely accurate. Even if 45% of younger Mississippians (in the electorate) are black and all young black Mississippians voted for Kerry, that would translate into 33% of young white Mississippians voting Kerry, which compared to 14% of all white Mississippians, is highly unlikely.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

True though Louisiana whites had a strong GOP swing, though it's possible people blamed the Dem Blanco moreso than Bush.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Up until this election, the Atlanta suburbs were very Republican. A lot of the suburban counties had strong Obama swings--though I'm not sure if this is juist from blacks moving to the suburbs or if there's been an anti-GOP trend among suburban Atlanta whites.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2009, 11:27:36 AM »

Oh boy, the Texas crap again.  No, you cannot predict the future, no Texas is not going to be Democratic any time in the near future, and no trends don't hold.  On top of that, your calculations were shoddy at best.
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2009, 02:04:11 PM »

Some interesting analysis of the youth vote here.

The two comments are pretty detailed and insightful as well.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2009, 02:13:45 PM »
« Edited: August 03, 2009, 04:56:21 AM by pbrower2a »

Oh boy, the Texas crap again.  No, you cannot predict the future, no Texas is not going to be Democratic any time in the near future, and no trends don't hold.  On top of that, your calculations were shoddy at best.

Texas is a big state, but it isn't the whole story. In fact it is tangential to the big story. The leading trend of the electoral future is the voting habits of the youngest members of the electorate. Voters older than they do not increase in numbers; if anything, death and senescence remove them from the electorate. The voting habits of people now under 30 suggest that America is going to lean more, and not less, liberal over the next twenty years or so.

Just take a good look at the 2008 election: Obama got 248 electoral votes from states and the District of Columbia -- electoral votes that hadn't gone to any Republican Presidential nominee after 1988. Those states weren't close. They young-adult vote in every one of those states (except for Washington and Oregon for which there is no data) is stronger than the at-large vote in those states. The youngest voters show no tendency to reverse a bad trend -- a bad trend for the GOP, that is. The only "good" news for the GOP in those states is that their population is shrinking compared to the rest of the country, which means that "only" 240 or so electoral votes are sure things for Obama in 2012 unless he is a catastrophic failure as President. That is 90% of a loss for the GOP right there.

Iowa, New Hampshire, and New Mexico all voted for Dubya once -- and young voters voted 63%, 61%, and 77% for Obama, respectively. Obama won Iowa and New Hampshire by 9% margins of victory in 2008, so the double-digit Blue Firewall looks as it will solidify some in 2012... that's about 15 more electoral votes (should Iowa lose a congressional seat) getting further out of reach. With 70% of young voters going for Obama in Nevada, the Silver State will be a worse gamble for the GOP than its slot machines.  Without the young voters those states are about 50-50 D/R.  So the GOP has practically lost 260 electoral votes before they get to states more Republican than the national average. It will have to win just about everything else to win the Presidential election in 2012.

Now we get to states and a district that were more Republican than the national average that Obama won:

Virginia?  63% -- bigger than the statewide vote by about 10%.  A GOP loss that it can't afford.
Colorado?  No data. I can't say anything.
Florida?   61% --  Alligator bite.
Ohio?      61% --  GOP chances in 2012 look to be rusting away.
Indiana?  63% -- drifting into a concrete wall at the Speedway.
North Carolina?  If you are GOP you don't want to see it.
NE-02?    54% -- mercifully the only electoral vote at stake in the state.

Missouri and Montana seem like strong candidates for Democratic pickups just from demographic change.

Arizona? If the Republicans want to hold this state they might need John Kyl as the VP candidate.

The good news for the GOP?

Young voters were more R than D in Georgia, so Georgia probably doesn't flip.

Young voters in the Dakotas are just slightly more D than R, so even though McCain won them by margins under 10% the Democrats seem unlikely to pick them up. Maybe in the farm-and-ranch areas kids are closer to their parents on political matters.

Texas will be closer -- much closer. Obama has little chance of winning it.

Much of the South? It depends upon whether someone like Barbour or Huckabee is the GOP nominee (in which Obama has no chance of winning there)  or whether white people in some states can bring themselves to vote for someone who doesn't look like them. Young voters show much less polarization by race than their parents.

... I can't predict the future with precision. All that I can do is to predict what is impossible. The GOP can win with its current coalition in 2012 only if Obama is catastrophically inept or grossly corrupt. 






  

  
Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2009, 06:31:06 PM »

The GOP has put themselves in a pretty deep whole as they pretty much have completely alianated younger voters.  Now will they lose the young vote in the future by what they lost it in 08?  Perhaps not, but they still have a long way to go.

As far as Mississippi and the differences between 04 and 08 go.  Keep in mind that not all polls are perfect.  You will generally have 1 poll out of 20 which is outside the MOE.  So when you have a set of 50 exit polls, you will likely have 2 or 3 polls which are off by a bit.  This appears to be the case in Mississippi in 04, and Maine as well

I think the GOP basically has to attract at least my vote in order for it to be successful in the future- something like a latter day Rockefeller Republican vote.  They can certainly do it, but not with Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Rush Limbaugh and the wingjobs at the helm.  Meghan McCain- absolutely (bonus- I like her curvier body!) though I don't agree with her on a few things still. 

I'll be honest.  It took GW Bush and the combination of Ed Rendell running for Gov to convert me from an Independent to a Democrat.  There's a lot I'm not happy with in regards to local Democrats, but the national Republicans are just frigging out there.     
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 03, 2009, 01:05:04 AM »

Back in May, Nate Silver did an interesting comparison of party ID based on age and who was president when you turned 18.  I think it speaks fairly well to the "can you predict the future" question.  You can find Nate's post here.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2009, 06:18:06 AM »

I'm not sure if I understand what this post is asking, but I'll try to give my opinion and analysis on it. If the post is asking whether my generation (young voters ages 18-29) will remain strongly Democratic in years to come, I don't think anyone can predict that, but I'll offer my take on it.

Everyone has already mentioned it elsewhere on this forum, but young voters are much more liberal on social issues than the general population and that doesn't bode well for the Republicans who's the party of anything and everything that's only conservative. The Republicans are either going to have to "moderate" on the social issues (maybe take a middle-of-the-road position on abortion such as, "We are pro-life but support abortion only in cases of rape and incest and if the woman's life is threatened during a harmful pregnancy" as opposed to "Abortion is murder and if you support it, you're going to Hell!" and on gay marriage they could say something like, "We believe marriage is between a man and a woman but support civil unions for gay couples," as opposed to "Homosexuality is a sin and anyone who supports their agenda is going to Hell.") or they're going to have to ultimately ditch the Religious Right wing of their party and become more libertarian in their message. But since I don't see either happening, I'd say that as things are right now, my generation will remain strongholds of the Democratic Party, but ultimately I do think that things could change over the course of time.

If you look at the exit polls at the anti-gay and anti-abortion ballot measures that some states had in 2008, you'll see an alarming trend of progressivism among my generation:

Arizona - Proposition 102: Ban on Gay Marriage (Passed 56-44)
• 18-29: 48% Yes, 52% No
• 30-44: 58% Yes, 42% No
• 45-64: 54% Yes, 46% No
• 65+: 63% Yes, 37% No

Arkansas - Initiative 1: Ban on Gay Couples Adopting Children (Passed 57-43)
• 18-24: 44% Yes, 56% No
• 25-29: 47% Yes, 53% No

• 30-39: 61% Yes, 39% No
• 40-49: 54% Yes, 46% No
• 50-64: 59% Yes, 41% No
• 65+: 65% Yes, 35% No 

California - Proposition 8: Ban on Gay Marriage (Passed 52-48)
• 18-24: 36% Yes, 64% No
• 25-29: 41% Yes, 59% No

• 30-39: 52% Yes, 48% No
• 40-49: 59% Yes, 41% No
• 50-64: 51% Yes, 49% No
• 65+: 61% Yes, 39% No

Florida - Amendment 2: Ban on Gay Marriage (Passed 62-38)
• 18-24: 52% Yes, 48% No
• 25-29: 54% Yes, 46% No
• 30-39: 63% Yes, 37% No
• 40-49: 66% Yes, 34% No
• 50-64: 61% Yes, 39% No
• 65+: 66% Yes, 34% No

Michigan - Proposition 2: Allow Stem Cell Research (Passed 52-48)
• 18-24: 59% Yes, 41% No
• 25-29: 60% Yes, 40% No

• 30-39: 53% Yes, 47% No
• 40-49: 50% Yes, 50% No
• 50-64: 53% Yes, 47% No
• 65+: 47% Yes, 53% No

South Dakota - Initiative 11: Abortion Limits (Failed 45-55)
• 18-24: 41% Yes, 59% No
• 25-29: 39% Yes, 61% No

• 30-39: 46% Yes, 54% No
• 40-49: 44% Yes, 56% No
• 50-64: 47% Yes, 53% No
• 65+: N/A
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2009, 06:31:35 PM »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

After Dubya, whom they will know and revile, they won't expect perfection from Obama. The youngest voters of 2012 will have been born in 1994; they will remember 9/11, which happened when they were almost seven at the youngest. They will remember the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  They will remember the grandiose stunt of the President fling a naval aircraft onto an aircraft carrier to a banner reading "Mission Accomplished" only to find out later that the war continued in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course they will remember the subprime lending scam and real estate bubble coming to a bad end.  Many will have recognized as young as age 14 that Sarah Palin was a political disaster.

The "mission accomplished" event is probably not in these voters' memory.

They will also remember Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, the huge deficits that they will have to pay off, as well as others.

If Obama fails on healthcare and/or raises taxes, they will become more cynical of politicians and trend to the right. Either of those is possible, though if they will actually occur remains to be seen.

Also remember, the youth who voted heavily for Reagan in '84, the youngest of which were 6 or 7 in 1972, lived through watergate. That hardly drove them away from the GOP.   
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2009, 05:05:23 PM »
« Edited: August 10, 2009, 07:32:44 PM by pbrower2a »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

After Dubya, whom they will know and revile, they won't expect perfection from Obama. The youngest voters of 2012 will have been born in 1994; they will remember 9/11, which happened when they were almost seven at the youngest. They will remember the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  They will remember the grandiose stunt of the President fling a naval aircraft onto an aircraft carrier to a banner reading "Mission Accomplished" only to find out later that the war continued in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course they will remember the subprime lending scam and real estate bubble coming to a bad end.  Many will have recognized as young as age 14 that Sarah Palin was a political disaster.

The "mission accomplished" event is probably not in these voters' memory.

Keith Olbermann won't let people forget.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If people have jobs, they won't care about the deficits. Deficits are designed so that people don't have to think about them.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It depends (1) whether Republicans get blame for the first failure, and (2) how taxes are presented and how people cover the deficits. This may be the time for pushing the peacetime equivalent of War Bonds -- call them "Recovery Bonds" this time.

I am surprised that you did not mention inflation, but the pushing of bonds and the raising of taxes are two effective ways of preventing inflation.

The current young voters will on the whole drift away from the Left as some begin to have lucrative professions, become executives, or start seeing their small businesses grow. That is the minority. That generation is much more liberal than Generation X at like age and somewhat more liberal than Boomers at like age.     

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Watergate scandal didn't kill anyone, and it didn't cause an economic meltdown. The conservative resurgence demonstrated quickly how stale New Deal liberalism had become. Stagflation hurt the reputation of Gerald Ford and then Jimmy Carter.

In 1980, people were concerned about an affront to national pride (Americans held hostage in Iran), and the candidate willing to show more belligerence on the matter seemed right. "Liberal" economics seemed to bring stagflation, and the Supply Side economics that Ronald Reagan promoted looked like a more valid solution than "more of the same".   
 
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2009, 07:38:12 PM »

They will also remember Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, the huge deficits that they will have to pay off, as well as others.

Am I take it that only Democrats should be held accountable for deficits?

Reagan wasn't held accountable in 1984. Bush 43 wasn't held accountable in 2004. In Reagan's case, the economy had come roaring back. In Bush's case, not that many Americans were focused on the economy - and those who were heavily broke for Kerry

The way I see it is that government should endeavour to live within its means, during the good times, perhaps running up a nice surplus, which will come in handy along with any necessary deficit spending to combat the bad times

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The conservative hero, that was Reagan, mindful of deficits, actually signed-off on tax increases in six of his eight years as president. Principles often go out of the window when you are faced with the realities of governing

The biggest tragedy of the Bush presidency lay in the fact that for most of his tenure he had a Republican Congress granting him, just about, his every whim and folly like that of some compliant wife Roll Eyes, especially when you consider just how fiscally inept he proved himself

Unfunded tax cuts? Yes, Mr. President. Unfunded spending? Yes, Mr. President

Senate Democrats, IIRC, wanted to increase taxes on the wealthy to help to pay for the war in Iraq. Fiscal responsbility and Bush? Duh Roll Eyes

Hopefully, in time, Democrats can rein in spending because right now spending seems to be all that is preventing (perhaps has) prevented the recession becoming a depression. That's about the only thing them 'Tea Baggers' would guarantee. Posters reading "Taxed Enough Yet" are an absurdity considering the vast majority of Americans received a tax cut as part of the stimulus

There should be no trend to the Right - at least, not yet - given that Obama deserves his fair shot at having to fix a Right ol' mess
Logged
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,053
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2009, 09:02:08 PM »

The GOP has badly alienated any that's not socially conservative and that was pretty clear in 08 where they voted in droves for Obama.

Younger voters are much more liberal and until the GOP accepts the FACT that moderates are important in the party, they will continue to lose everything.

Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 10, 2009, 04:55:05 PM »

Here is the link to an article by Alan Abramowitz of Emory University, and a Senior Columnist for Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball, which takes a look at the youth vote in 2008

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=AIA2009043001
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,110
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 11, 2009, 02:17:23 AM »
« Edited: August 11, 2009, 02:19:33 AM by DS0816 »

The youngest voters from 2004-2008

State       2004 Margin      2008 Margin            Swing

The Mid-Atlantic

PA            60-39 Kerry       66-34 Obama              D + 6
DE           54-45 Kerry        71-25 Obama        D + 17


Much is appreciated of your efforts. But you're looking strictly at how the Democratic candidates of 2004 [John Kerry] and 2008 [Barack Obama] performed.

What you're not doing is considering—and comparing—the margins in this group between the two major parties: Republican and Democratic.

They're even greater.

Yes, Obama had six more points in Pennsylvania than John Kerry. But get this: Kerry had 21 points over Bush with this group in 2004 Pa. Obama had 32 points over McCain with the same group in 2008 Pa. That's an 11-point Democratic swing.

In 2004 Delaware, Kerry won the group over Bush by 9 points. In 2008 Del., Obama won the group over McCain by 46 points. That's a 37-point Democratic swing.
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,110
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 11, 2009, 02:50:26 AM »

Current 14-18 year olds will only have known a Democratically controlled government (since they became aware of politics and such), so any mistakes made by Obama and the Democrats will hurt them significantly with the youth.

After Dubya, whom they will know and revile, they won't expect perfection from Obama. The youngest voters of 2012 will have been born in 1994; they will remember 9/11, which happened when they were almost seven at the youngest. They will remember the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  They will remember the grandiose stunt of the President fling a naval aircraft onto an aircraft carrier to a banner reading "Mission Accomplished" only to find out later that the war continued in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course they will remember the subprime lending scam and real estate bubble coming to a bad end.  Many will have recognized as young as age 14 that Sarah Palin was a political disaster.

The "mission accomplished" event is probably not in these voters' memory.

They will also remember Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, the huge deficits that they will have to pay off, as well as others.

If Obama fails on healthcare and/or raises taxes, they will become more cynical of politicians and trend to the right. Either of those is possible, though if they will actually occur remains to be seen.

Also remember, the youth who voted heavily for Reagan in '84, the youngest of which were 6 or 7 in 1972, lived through watergate. That hardly drove them away from the GOP.   


This is wishful, Republican Talking Points thinking.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 11, 2009, 08:49:44 PM »

The youngest voters from 2004-2008

State       2004 Margin      2008 Margin            Swing

The Mid-Atlantic

PA            60-39 Kerry       66-34 Obama              D + 6
DE           54-45 Kerry        71-25 Obama        D + 17


Much is appreciated of your efforts. But you're looking strictly at how the Democratic candidates of 2004 [John Kerry] and 2008 [Barack Obama] performed.

What you're not doing is considering—and comparing—the margins in this group between the two major parties: Republican and Democratic.

They're even greater.

Yes, Obama had six more points in Pennsylvania than John Kerry. But get this: Kerry had 21 points over Bush with this group in 2004 Pa. Obama had 32 points over McCain with the same group in 2008 Pa. That's an 11-point Democratic swing.

In 2004 Delaware, Kerry won the group over Bush by 9 points. In 2008 Del., Obama won the group over McCain by 46 points. That's a 37-point Democratic swing.

Those margins are of course gigantic. I reasonably expect those margins to shrink after 2012 as this voting  group begins to have cause to trend conservative. They will find children in adolescence, and that ordinarily prompts cultural conservatism.  Add to that, some will escape the glass ceilings and piked pits of Corporate America  and climb the corporate ladder. Big Business insists that executives and junior executives be right-wingers. Some will be successful in businesses and professions and be more concerned about labor costs (unions) and taxes than about revenue.

Such is to be expected in times other than a 4T. A 4T throws a wrench into the usual machinery; it changes the relationship between the government and the populace. This one can result in America becoming a European-style social democracy.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.085 seconds with 11 queries.