The kids are alright

The Pew Research Center’s latest report notes, “Trends in the opinions of America’s youngest voters are often a barometer of shifting political winds.” If so, the winds are at Democrats’ backs, and will be for a quite a while. While young people shifted to the Democratic Party a bit in the 1990s, the bottom fell out for the GOP and younger voters during Bush’s presidency.

In 1992, Republicans enjoyed a slight edge in party identification among 18-29 year olds, 47% to 46%. Four years later, Democrats claimed a six-point edge, 50% to 44%. By the time of the 2000 election, Democrats’ lead had expanded slightly to eight points, 49% to 41%.

And voters under the age of 30 have been making a beeline from the Republican Party ever since. In 2004, Democrats’ lead among young voters’ party ID expanded to 11 points, 51% to 40%. And in 2008, the margin became a landslide — Democrats 58%, Republicans 33%.

What’s striking is not just the one-sided nature of young voters’ preferences, but the speed with which the change occurred. As recently as the 2002 midterms, voters aged 18 to 29 split evenly between Democrats and Republicans. In the 2006 midterms, they backed Democrats, 63% to 33%. Between 2004 and 2008, the party ID shift has more than doubled in Dems’ direction.

The change is also broadly based. From the Pew report:

In fact, the Democrats’ advantage among the young is now so broad-based that younger men as well as younger women favor the Democrats over the GOP — making their age category the only one in the electorate in which men are significantly more inclined to self-identify as Democrats rather than as Republicans.

While more women voters in every age group affiliate with the Democratic Party rather than the GOP, the gap is particularly striking among young women voters; more than twice as many women voters under age 30 identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party as favor the Republican Party (63% vs. 28%).

Talk about your emerging Democratic majority.

Now, I know that some of you are thinking that young people always tend to be liberal, and then get more conservative as they get older. But that really doesn’t apply here.

As Marc Ambinder explained:

When Bill Clinton was elected, a plurality of people under 30 identified themselves as Republicans. Same thing when Ronald Reagan was elected. Politically, today’s cohort of 18-to-29 year olds came of age during the Bush presidency. It has turned them into Democrats.

If Republicans look at these numbers, and don’t feel a sense of dread, they’re not looking closely enough. Eight years of Bush’s policies have helped drive an entire generation of voters into the Democratic Party.

I’d just add that this isn’t just about partisanship; it’s also ideological. I’m reminded of this poll of younger voters taken last year.

Young Americans are more likely than the general public to favor a government-run universal health care insurance system, an open-door policy on immigration and the legalization of gay marriage, according to a New York Times/CBS News/MTV poll. […]

Forty-four percent said they believed that same-sex couples should be permitted to get married, compared with 28 percent of the public at large. They are more likely than their elders to support the legalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana. […]

In the current poll, 62 percent said they would support a universal, government-sponsored national health care insurance program; 47 percent of the general public holds that view. And 30 percent said that “Americans should always welcome new immigrants,” while 24 percent of the general public holds that view.

The same poll noted that 28% of this age group describe themselves as “liberal,” eight points higher than the rest of the U.S. population.

In 1984, Reagan won 59% of the youth vote. Four years later, H.W. Bush won 52%. At this point, Republicans shouldn’t expect a majority anytime soon.

I remember reading some long-term forecasts not too long ago pointing to population shifts causing problems for Dems. People are moving away from “blue” strongholds (particularly in the Northeast), and relocating to “red” states in the South and West that will grow in electoral significance.

But counteracting this may very well be a generational shift that benefits Dems even more.

I’m tempted to send Bush a thank-you note.

And we lose how many of these people for how many years if it’s perceived that the old-fart establishment unfairly gave the nomination to Clinton despite Obama winning by every reasonable measure?

  • Good point, Maria. I think we’re witnessing the beginnings of a tipping point. Assuming politicians ACTUALLY help bring about the change they promise, and heed which way the wind is blowing.

  • A lot of credit must go to Howard Dean’s 50-state enrollment strategy and then to Barack Obama’s campaign for following up on it with so many young voter registrations.

  • One of the only “benefits” of the current Iraq War is that Bush has not only created a new generation of Democrats, but a new generation of activists as well.

  • Good point, Maria. I think we’re witnessing the beginnings of a tipping point. Assuming politicians ACTUALLY help bring about the change they promise, and heed which way the wind is blowing.

    I’m not overoptimistic about Obama being a significant change agent. I do know that he is vastly superior to the Clintons and what they’re offering. With Hillary as president, progressive policies and values definitely lose. With Obama, we might have a chance at something focused more on the citizenry and less on corporatism.

    From the perspective of party strength, there’s no contest. He understands and embraces not just modern campaigning and new media, but in particular the 50-state strategy, which we absolutely must have to go forward as a more effective and electable party. Because they really don’t care about downticket Democrats, the Clintons and their worn-out consultants and pundits cling desperately to the worthless old DLC model of ignoring Democrats in all but a handful of states. That strategy has missed countless opportunities to strengthen our numbers municipally, at a statewide level and in Congress.

    I’m not happy about how many older white women are unhappy with Obama’s victory, even though I believe most of them choose that unhappiness in their selfish inability to see past their own sense of gender discrimination to acknowledge the marginalization that African Americans have faced and continue to endure. But all other things being even–and all other things aren’t even, as Obama has fairly won this race–the Democratic party can better afford to let some enraged older white women go than it can stand to lose every African American today (and perhaps for a good long time) and all younger voters for a generation.

    And really, if one can’t bring herself to support the Democratic nominee no matter who it may be, that person has no business pretending to be a Democrat. That goes for Obama supporters, too.

  • This wonderful graphic from the NY Times shows that the main determinants of political party are the party of the president when an age cohort came of age and how he was perceived. Most of those who came of age during Truman, Ike, Reagan, Bush I and Clinton followed the party of the Pres, but those who came of age during Nixon and Bush II are the staunchest Dems, along with those who came of age while Truman was Pres.

    People may get more conservative in some respects as they get older but their political party doesn’t seem to change unless they get richer.

  • Actually, looking at the graphic again, even when Ike was President there were more Dems among those coming of age, but it was still one of the GOP high points.

  • “I’m tempted to send Bush a thank-you note.”

    Why? The Democrats are still spineless and unlikely to do anything the slightest bit controversial with their majority. The voters gave them majorities in the house and Senate in 2006 and a mandate to get us out of Iraq and we now have more troops there than ever.

  • This age group can’t help but be better informed. They get their news from Jon Stewart instead of the MSM.

  • Finally, this is what I’ve been saying all along. For those who don’t just laugh in the face of those threatening a McCain presidency if we don’t blah blah blah…take a good look. Dems could nominate a one eyed monkey and still win the general. The GOP controlled media tries desperately to convince us that the middle is conservative when conservative is far…far right. Take heed blue dog dems…the middle is progressive liberal. A “small” group of very wealthy neocon privatization profiteers known as the money party have virtually destroyed our democracy on all fronts while using terms like “most Americans” to justify their behavior when in fact most Americans (shown by the polls) feel just the opposite of what our media stars have been trying to make us believe.
    Republicans have been stealing votes while always trying to convince us the race is “close” so we don’t look too closely at the results they refuse to show us (this is why the repubs in congress refuse to allow a paper trail) but don’t you believe it. Gore won in 2000, Kerry won in ’04, and the only presidential race in ’08 is the democratic primary. Just read how the election was stolen from Siegleman in the middle of the night and why the republican gov of Alabama refuses to allow a vote count to this day. 75% of this nation will not vote McCain so why does the press keep telling us it’s going to be close.
    More wars McCain, without a healthcare plan and permanent tax cuts for the wealthy who is two steps away from senility, wrong every step of the way on the Iraq war/occupation…what a joke. Not a hero, not a maverick, not a straight talker or shooter, just a briber of the press. Know that it’s not close, that we can get away from privatization of our democracy and the security bubble (bigger than Hollywood or the music industry) protecting companies like Haliburton will burst out of necessity. We’ve been ripped off long enough and the economy is broke.

  • What concerns me is whether the youth will show up to vote in November. The Mega-Corporate Media has decided that McCain is teh best candidate evah, but the youth get their info from Jon Stewart, not the MCM. If McCain keeps pushing for his endless war, the youth will show up to kick his ass. But if the MCM fools them into thinking that McCain is a reasonable person (as they did for Bush in 2000) we could be in real trouble.

    The clueless old people vote is probably another demo to watch, and the zionist/fundies will be painting a turban on Obama so get ready for a fight.

  • Although part of the >50 demographic and a registered independent, I am much more liberal today than I was during my early 20’s. I’ve seen first hand the negative impact of a corporate/fascist government and it is not pretty.

  • ***Liberal*** “…Why? The Democrats are still spineless and unlikely to do anything the slightest bit controversial with their majority. The voters gave them majorities in the house and Senate in 2006 and a mandate to get us out of Iraq and we now have more troops there than ever.”

    They claim that with a dem president all this will change. No vetoes, no obstruction from the senate which has stopped everything dems tried to accomplish…couldn’t get a veto proof majority. Look at all that would have already been accomplished if dems didn’t have to worry about a veto proof majority on their bills. Sure they could have made repubs filibuster everything but there was still the veto to overcome. We will eliminate this obstructionism which stood in the way of dems attempts to legislate. So take heart.

  • Racer X
    I, too, was concerned about the younger generation (from which I have been absent for about 10 years) showing up to vote.
    Turns out that the increase in the under 30 set turning Democrat is closely shadowed by a steady increase in participation.
    I’m optimistic on this front. The voting habit, like brushing your teeth, if learned young, will be habit forming. I see a tipping point that approaches a sort of “mob metality” where youth get youth to go to the polls.

  • BTW Maria***it wasn’t Obama who brought out the young vote or the reason why so many have joined the democratic party…they would have done so even if there were no Obama out of the necessity to change the direction of this Bush disaster. We are lucky Obama is here but even without him voters are fed up with this republican fiasco and enough is enough no matter what we have to do to get rid of these repukes. These young voters want to change the direction of this country and Obama just got in front of that parade but he is not the reason these voters came out. They want all this to end. They want our democracy restored with or without Obama.

  • In case anyone is interested in a personal story, I’m in the latter end of that age group (18-29) and these articles exactly describe what happened with me.

    2000 was the first presidential election I was able to vote in. At the time I was very politically immature and went mainly off of what my parents (ardent Republicans) and their news sources (conservative talk radio) said. I had only superficial knowledge and I voted for Bush over Gore due to being sick of the dishonesty of the Clintons and wanting change. Yes I am kind of ashamed of this now 😉

    It was in the run up to the Iraq war where my support for George W. Bush ended. I saw through his lawyerly speech that he didn’t really believe what he was saying and didn’t see going to war with Iraq as a good idea. Over the next couple of years I went from being unsupportive to being completely appalled by how dishonest and brazenly incompetent (and unconcerned about it) the running of this country became, due to everything being hyper politicized.

    Now here I am. I have a yearning for the middle road (which is much closer to blue than red right now) and see the Republicans as having become thoroughly corrupted by power. It’s time for change and I think that all three candidates are great compared to Bush (though McCain’s turn into Bush 2.0 has disqualified him completely) and I’m a strong Obama supporter. I don’t ever expect to identify as a Republican again regardless of my sympathy for some goals conservatives had before coming into power (states rights, less federal spending, 2nd amendment support, less corruption, hah). The only way I will go back is if Democrats come into power and it corrupts them as thoroughly… though it is hard to imagine them being able to compare with Dubya/Cheney/Rove…

    Btw, the status of my “ardent Republican” parents. Both of them still hate Hillary Clinton regardless of whether Bill Kristol and Limbaugh love her now or not. I brought my mother over to be an Obama supporter (Republicans for Obama, the message of cross-party appeals to her) and she has been cheering him on since he pulled out a win in Iowa. My father is now a “conservative” not a Republican and is thoroughly disenchanted by the Republican party by doing nothing really “conservative” with their power and by some of the leaders supporting illegal immigration.

    End tally:
    +2 for Democrats
    -1 for Republicans

  • joey, there’s no doubt that everyone, young people in particular, are fed up with the disasters of the Bush administration. But young people have been fed up before, and consistently stayed away from the polls in large numbers. Obama has been a very big piece, one of the driving pieces, of this groundswell of activism among young people. He didn’t “get in front of the parade”; he helped organize it. To this group, he represents a very different kind of political presence than they’ve ever seen, growing up as they did with only Bushes and Clintons for an example.

    If you doubt this, picture this race without him. Do you really believe that Hillary Clinton would bring out under-30s in more than a fraction of these numbers? And while turning her fuschia-and-yellow back on the 50-state strategy. With no grassroots organization and a laughable unfamiliarity with the power and opportunity of new media? No way.

    Obama is the reason the under-30s (and many of the under-40s) will even go to the polls this year. They may have wanted change before, but they didn’t believe there was a way to get it before they found him. These people are not interested in voting for Hillary Clinton and they are really not interested in being told by party powers that the guy who won it fair and square with their help won’t be the candidate. There isn’t a better way than that to tell a whole generation, “Don’t even fucking bother. The system is broken beyond repair.”

  • Maria:

    I’m in this age group and I agree with you. My friends and I needed something to cut through our cynicism about politics. Even though Hillary would probably make a good president, I see her as more of the same just more competent. She isn’t a very strong motivating force for me to go vote and does nothing to dispel the cynicism that long term we’re not going to ever break out of the hyper-political slump we’re in (regardless of whether that is possible). The “hope” line is cheesy, but when the base line is a tough skin of cynicism, it takes something dramatic to motivate people.

    My take is that young people switched to the Democratic party, but it takes an extra push to bring people out to actually vote and Obama is it.

    And yeah… giving it to Hillary with Obama leading in everything would be a pretty big disaster. It wouldn’t be nearly as bad if she didn’t switch to Republican tactics when she started losing, but she has lost all of my sympathy.

  • There was a recent study – I don’t have the link – that refuted the conventional wisdom that one becomes more conservative as one ages. And there is that saying that “People don’t change; they just become more so.”

    Personally, I don’t understand conservatism, and never have. Everything changes over time, everything. We have to adapt, constantly, or wither and die. It’s true about everything. Evolution is everywhere. What is that saying – a conservative is one who sits athwart history and yells, “Stop!”

    Liberals should always lead in a dynamic society. The role of the conservative should be to hold the reins, so the liberal doesn’t get overly enthusiastic and charge over the cliff. Never harness your cart to a conservative. It won’t go anywhere.

  • It only matters if these newly minted young Dems vote. And that’s far from a sure thing. Polls have been notoriously wrong so far, and hopefully the ones showing an even split, more-or-less- between McSame and a Dem are wrong as well. How 81% say the country is on the wrong course, but half support the Rethugs is a mystery. A close election is subject all the more to stealing, and the only way we’ll see a Dem in the WH come next January is by an overwhelming landslide that can’t be manipulated.

    These young people all have to vote, and that’s where the GOTV efforts should be directed.

  • To echo what Adam said I am roughly in his age range (a bit too young to vote in 2000, though I slightly preferred Bush). For the most part I paid little attention to politics and self identified as a libertarien (small ‘l’).

    What really changed my mind was Bush’s position on the teaching of Intelligent Design. It really served as a catalyst for me to get better informed on the current state of politics. Then there was was avalanche of shady/outright illegal behavior coming form the White House and the lengths congressional Republicans went to ignore/justify it (not to mention all the issues surrounding the Iraq War/Occupation).

    I saw the reputation and integrity of America crumble before my eyes and knew I would never vote for a Republican. I think a lot of people in my generation feel that the Republican party has trashed the country we are going to be running in the near future. Between the debacle in Iraq, horrible standing in the world, defunct economic policies and crippling national debt we have a lot of issues to clean up. The Republicans burned the bridge to today’s youth and have no one to blame but themselves.

  • Adam (18): You express yourself well. Thanks. One other small thing I hope people learned from the 2000 election. Many voted for Bush because they thought he would be a return to his father’s administration. It seems many today are making the same mistake (my opinion) with Hillary.

  • NB (#6) said: One of the only “benefits” of the current Iraq War is that Bush has not only created a new generation of Democrats, but a new generation of activists as well.

    This is so true. There’s a new Students for a Democratic Society who are as committed as we were, and from everything I read that they’re putting out, a whole lot more intelligent in how to go about it.

    Then there are the heroes of their generation in Iraq Veterans Against the War who are truly amazing. I feel really privileged that I am involved in a project now that has me working with them. I have to run to catch up.

    Ten years ago, I coined the joke-that-wasn’t of “don’t trust anybody under 30″ – well, that is true no more.

  • Comments are closed.