Why is The USA shifting leftward

[Rockefeller GOP]

Also, rural areas really aren't shifting leftward. Granted, the rural areas are also losing population.

The rural areas aren't shifting leftwards because they're losing most of their gay liberals as well as their women, any other questions?

We're in a period where rural areas are very open to conservatism ... That's not true everywhere in the US, it hasn't always been true and it won't always be true in the future.

[eric82oslo]

Also, rural areas really aren't shifting leftward. Granted, the rural areas are also losing population.

The rural areas aren't shifting leftwards because they're losing most of their gay liberals as well as their women, any other questions?

We're in a period where rural areas are very open to conservatism ... That's not true everywhere in the US, it hasn't always been true and it won't always be true in the future.

Looooolz, what an answer. That was seriously the best you could give?

[hopper]

10. The strongly rightward shift of the Republican party at the same time as more and more voters regard themselves as independents. There are (probably) quite a few more points to be made as well, but these are the ones that came to my mind now.

Only 13% Of Americans consider themselves "Pure Independents" per Gallup once you take in numbers  "Leaners" toward either the R or D side.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Also, rural areas really aren't shifting leftward. Granted, the rural areas are also losing population.

The rural areas aren't shifting leftwards because they're losing most of their gay liberals as well as their women, any other questions?

We're in a period where rural areas are very open to conservatism ... That's not true everywhere in the US, it hasn't always been true and it won't always be true in the future.

Looooolz, what an answer. That was seriously the best you could give?

... What are you even talking about?  That response was OC-status.

[StatesPoll]

most country, when young = liberal, getting older = become conservative

[sg0508]

Gen Y becoming more and more powerful in terms of the electorate.  The Democrats have done a much better job of catering (or at least giving the appearance as such) to Gen Y.

There is very little that the GOP has to offer Gen Y (again, at least in appearance).

[tallguy23]

Gen Y becoming more and more powerful in terms of the electorate.  The Democrats have done a much better job of catering (or at least giving the appearance as such) to Gen Y.

There is very little that the GOP has to offer Gen Y (again, at least in appearance).

This is a huge reason.

Gen Y is now the largest group in the workforce and the overall population. By 2020/2024 they'll be the biggest chunk of voters too.

[Ogre Mage]

Name a single issue, other than gay marriage and perhaps drugs, where we are to the left of where we were a generation ago.  There aren't any!

During the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s crime was a serious concern and many politicians (like Bill Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and Martin O'Malley) pursued "tough on crime" policies.  Today the bigger concern is criminal justice reform and police treatment of minorities.

In the early 1990s support for interracial marriage was 48%.  In 2013 support for interracial marriage was 87%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-whites.aspx

[RINO Tom]

most country, when young = liberal, getting older = become conservative

That's been disproved several times, hasn't it?  For example, Bush 41 ran better with the youth vote than the senior vote, and seniors voted to the left of the general electorate in 2000.  Most studies find that people make their partisan decisions based on who was in power when they were around 18.  Older voters now remember the Eisenhower years and are very Republican ... but their parents weren't.

[Ogre Mage]

I would say that over the last generation there has been a very clear shift to the left in the United States on social policy.  

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183413/americans-continue-shift-left-key-moral-issues.aspx


There has been a shift to the left on economics too (probably due to the Great Recession) but here the advancement is less.  There is still a considerable amount of debate within the Democratic Party about economic policy while on social policy intraparty tensions have been largely resolved -- probably because we see the general public is with us.

[Stranger in a strange land]

most country, when young = liberal, getting older = become conservative

That's been disproved several times, hasn't it?  For example, Bush 41 ran better with the youth vote than the senior vote, and seniors voted to the left of the general electorate in 2000.  Most studies find that people make their partisan decisions based on who was in power when they were around 18.  Older voters now remember the Eisenhower years and are very Republican ... but their parents weren't.

Back in the 70s and 80s, Democrats tended to do better in Midterm elections because the senior vote actually skewed Democratic back then: the reason was the the FDR generation was still alive and were still loyal Democrats. The Silent Generation was much more conservative, and their children, Gen X, are also pretty right-wing, having come of age during the Reagan Years (there was a lot of Evangelical Christian & anti-PC stuff going on on campuses in the late 80s/early 90s when Gen X was in college).

[TarHeelDem]

There are many reasons, but one of the big ones is the increasing accessibility of higher education. More people are able to go to college now than fifty years ago. People become more liberal as they gain education.

[Virginiá]

most country, when young = liberal, getting older = become conservative

That's been disproved several times, hasn't it?  For example, Bush 41 ran better with the youth vote than the senior vote, and seniors voted to the left of the general electorate in 2000.  Most studies find that people make their partisan decisions based on who was in power when they were around 18.  Older voters now remember the Eisenhower years and are very Republican ... but their parents weren't.

You're right. This is largely a myth. Some people get a bit more conservative on some issues, while others may get more liberal on others. There is no real way of telling which way it will go unless you can predict future events.

What there is evidence of is that people largely lean towards the ideology/political party that they favored when coming of age. Kids that grew up during Reagan were more conservative, while kids that grew up during Clinton/Bush/Obama were a lot more liberal. These people (Millennials) will likely continue voting Democratic as they age just like the others. (I can't post my source due to new account, but search "pewresearch the politics of american generations")

I think the reason some think people get more conservative as they age is because for the past 20 - 25 years, the younger generation has skewed much more Democratic/liberal whereas the generation before them were conservative. The result is all those GenX'ers/some boomers who are now old are still conservative and it leaves that impression. However, it only leaves an impression and is not a trend.

In addition, generational replacement theories also explain why Democrats have a presidential election advantage and Republicans have a midterm advantage. Older people constitute a lot more of the midterm electorate and because those people grew up during the Carter/Reagan years (along with some boomers and the silent generation), they lean Republican. Once the Millennial generation gets older and minorities continue to move out of urban areas, Democrats will once again have the advantage in midterms. Likewise, young voters and minorities show up in far greater numbers in presidential elections, and thus the Democratic advantage.

It's funny because Republicans had a lock on presidential elections from 1968 - 1988, holding the White House for 20 of those 24 years, yet they never controlled all of Congress once during that time. Reagan's wave got him the Senate for 3 cycles, which was actually a preview of their upcoming Congressional dominance. I think what happens is the dominant parties first dominate presidential elections, then their coalition grows older and begins to dominate midterms as well. However, by this time, they most likely have lost their lock on the presidency and the cycle restarts in favor of the other party -- Unless the dominant party manages to "restart" their cycle (like the 1896 McKinley alignment).

[tallguy23]

most country, when young = liberal, getting older = become conservative

That's been disproved several times, hasn't it?  For example, Bush 41 ran better with the youth vote than the senior vote, and seniors voted to the left of the general electorate in 2000.  Most studies find that people make their partisan decisions based on who was in power when they were around 18.  Older voters now remember the Eisenhower years and are very Republican ... but their parents weren't.

You're right. This is largely a myth. Some people get a bit more conservative on some issues, while others may get more liberal on others. There is no real way of telling which way it will go unless you can predict future events.

What there is evidence of is that people largely lean towards the ideology/political party that they favored when coming of age. Kids that grew up during Reagan were more conservative, while kids that grew up during Clinton/Bush/Obama were a lot more liberal. These people (Millennials) will likely continue voting Democratic as they age just like the others. (I can't post my source due to new account, but search "pewresearch the politics of american generations")

I think the reason some think people get more conservative as they age is because for the past 20 - 25 years, the younger generation has skewed much more Democratic/liberal whereas the generation before them were conservative. The result is all those GenX'ers/some boomers who are now old are still conservative and it leaves that impression. However, it only leaves an impression and is not a trend.

In addition, generational replacement theories also explain why Democrats have a presidential election advantage and Republicans have a midterm advantage. Older people constitute a lot more of the midterm electorate and because those people grew up during the Carter/Reagan years (along with some boomers and the silent generation), they lean Republican. Once the Millennial generation gets older and minorities continue to move out of urban areas, Democrats will once again have the advantage in midterms. Likewise, young voters and minorities show up in far greater numbers in presidential elections, and thus the Democratic advantage.

It's funny because Republicans had a lock on presidential elections from 1968 - 1988, holding the White House for 20 of those 24 years, yet they never controlled all of Congress once during that time. Reagan's wave got him the Senate for 3 cycles, which was actually a preview of their upcoming Congressional dominance. I think what happens is the dominant parties first dominate presidential elections, then their coalition grows older and begins to dominate midterms as well. However, by this time, they most likely have lost their lock on the presidency and the cycle restarts in favor of the other party -- Unless the dominant party manages to "restart" their cycle (like the 1896 McKinley alignment).

Totally agree with this sentiment. There's also a theory that if a rising generation votes 3 times in a row for one party, they'll be mostly locked into supporting that party. Hence why many say the Millennials are staunchly in the Dem camp now.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Name a single issue, other than gay marriage and perhaps drugs, where we are to the left of where we were a generation ago.  There aren't any!

Public opinion is, but public policy isn't.

The abortion issue is the one that I am most familiar with, and public opinion is far more pro-life than 20 years ago.

It's still 50/50, actually.

Not really.  An overwhelming majority of Americans favor legalized abortion to at least some degree beyond rape and incest.

[Virginiá]

Totally agree with this sentiment. There's also a theory that if a rising generation votes 3 times in a row for one party, they'll be mostly locked into supporting that party. Hence why many say the Millennials are staunchly in the Dem camp now.

Yes, I've read about this. I always wondered why it is, but now I think it might just be the "symptom" of an ideological shift in a newer generation. Basically, a young person votes for the party whose platform/ideals are closest to theirs. After 3 elections (either 6 years, or more like 12 years if you just go by presidential elections), if they are still voting for the same party, then that means that both that party's platform is still relevant to that person and that the person's ideals have not changed significantly either. This could lead them to conclude that the other party(s) are not for them, thus locking them in. Though, "locked in" seems less appropriate. Maybe "heavily leans towards", as we all saw the GOP's Southern Strategy convert large swathes of Southern Democrats to Republicans over a period of decades.

[/]

I'm pretty sure social policy has steadily shifted left throughout the whole of modern history mostly due to urbanization and the media, but economic policy wavers regularly.

[5280]

I could see conservatives making inroads to higher education in the future, if they want to stay relevant in coming elections.

[hopper]

Name a single issue, other than gay marriage and perhaps drugs, where we are to the left of where we were a generation ago.  There aren't any!

During the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s crime was a serious concern and many politicians (like Bill Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and Martin O'Malley) pursued "tough on crime" policies.  Today the bigger concern is criminal justice reform and police treatment of minorities.

In the early 1990s support for interracial marriage was 48%.  In 2013 support for interracial marriage was 87%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-whites.aspx

Blacks.

[hopper]

There are many reasons, but one of the big ones is the increasing accessibility of higher education. More people are able to go to college now than fifty years ago. People become more liberal as they gain education.

Well yes and no. Yes-Obama won "Postgraduates" 55-42% but  lost College Graduate(but not Postgrad) to Mitt Romney in 2012 51-47%.

[DC Al Fine]

Name a single issue, other than gay marriage and perhaps drugs, where we are to the left of where we were a generation ago.  There aren't any!

Public opinion is, but public policy isn't.

The abortion issue is the one that I am most familiar with, and public opinion is far more pro-life than 20 years ago.

It's still 50/50, actually.

Not really.  An overwhelming majority of Americans favor legalized abortion to at least some degree beyond rape and incest.

It really depends on how you word the question





From these, we can draw the conclusion that a plurality of Americans don't like abortion, but also approve of some exceptions to allow for it. Furthermore, we can also conclude that opinions haven't moved very much on the issue.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Most Labor jobs provide lesser money to live off where high school graduates were able to provide for their family, now have been reduced to minimum wage jobs. That's where higher education comes in at & making real estate as the most important job readiness training skill that one can have. Even lawyers have switched from debt consolidation & suing to more marketble real estate training.  

And the middle class is being squeezed by higher mortgage tax rates. As voters are looking towards Dems instead of GOP, where the wealthy just want to repeal estates tax, that John McCain, George Vonovich & Chafee voted against in 2001.

As there is a cultural divide between blue collar whites, in Appalachia who are gun owners & union labors in North, who are minorities and gun control. Where Clinton may not win a single southern state. But, still win due to Iowa & Colorado.

[sg0508]

Again, maybe from a macro-level it's too simplified, but:

1) The electorate keeps getting younger
2) Most Gen Yers seem to care far more about social issues than fiscal ones.  That being said, many of my Co-Gen Yers have absolutely no clue what fiscal responsibility is and thus, charge up the credit cards thinking it will be society's problem to pay it off when they can't.
3) The average American (their fault or not) continues to get poorer and thus, more reliance on the gov't is needed year after year.

[Virginiá]

Again, maybe from a macro-level it's too simplified, but:

1) The electorate keeps getting younger
2) Most Gen Yers seem to care far more about social issues than fiscal ones.  That being said, many of my Co-Gen Yers have absolutely no clue what fiscal responsibility is and thus, charge up the credit cards thinking it will be society's problem to pay it off when they can't.
3) The average American (their fault or not) continues to get poorer and thus, more reliance on the gov't is needed year after year.

As I understand it, the youth share of the actual electorate hasn't changed much. It went to 19% from 2008-2012, which is good but pretty consistent, historically anyway. The damaging part is that is Millennials are heavily skewed towards Democrats and they are growing up and voting more and more. By 2016 they are expected to make up a full quarter of the electorate. All those young people who voted in 2008 are now going to be 8 years older, vote much more Democratic than the older generations, and are steadily replacing those people as the older generation "ages out" of the electorate.

There is also more to #3. It's not just people looking to the government but also the view that the wealthy and corporations are gaming the system, and Republicans are fully defending those people's inequality-widening actions and even trying to expand their ability to game the system. This issue is becoming the equivalent of the anti-government sentiment that shaped the GOP coalition from the 80s-now. Except this time, its the Republicans on the wrong side of the issue.

If Republican politicians changed with the times, they wouldn't be in this rut. But they continue to cling to their outdated views amid a growing electorate of people who do not think that way.

edited for clarification

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

NAFTA allowed them to hold onto states that Dubya won in 2000 & 2004, with Prez Fox. Mexicans have shifted to left in NM, CO & NV, all states Dubya carried over Kerry. In 2008, immigration reform shifted these states. Latinos keep getting stronger in SEIU unions as well, thus minimum wage is also a concern too for Blacks as well.