Map: If only Millennials (another for white Millennials) voted

[OneJ]

Link: https://m.mic.com/articles/157558/here-s-what-the-electoral-college-map-would-look-like-if-only-millennials-voted#.uHMy3KXqo

Interesting.

[Adam Griffin]

White Millennials are just as bad as their parents: full scoop at 11.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

There have been numerous polls with no or a very small gender gap.  This looks like a liberal website just using one extreme outlier (probably with a TINY sample size) to make a point.  Plus, in my GCS Tennessee poll, Trump was up by 20-something with millennials, not down like this makes it look.

[Boston Bread]

White Millennials are just as bad as their parents: full scoop at 11.

Romney did win white Millennials according to 2012 exit polls, but whatever the source is using for 2016 shows Clinton leading Trump by wide margins with this group.

[Alcon]

There have been numerous polls with no or a very small gender gap.  This looks like a liberal website just using one extreme outlier (probably with a TINY sample size) to make a point.  Plus, in my GCS Tennessee poll, Trump was up by 20-something with millennials, not down like this makes it look.

It's based on a SurveyMonkey poll, which has large enough samples.  I'm not sure why you're using an unweighted, small-sample GCS survey to 'rebut' SurveyMonkey's findings.  I don't know specifically, but I don't recall SurveyMonkey being a particular outlier in terms of the age gap.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

There have been numerous polls with no or a very small gender gap.  This looks like a liberal website just using one extreme outlier (probably with a TINY sample size) to make a point.  Plus, in my GCS Tennessee poll, Trump was up by 20-something with millennials, not down like this makes it look.

It's based on a SurveyMonkey poll, which has large enough samples.  I'm not sure why you're using an unweighted, small-sample GCS survey to 'rebut' SurveyMonkey's findings.  I don't know specifically, but I don't recall SurveyMonkey being a particular outlier in terms of the age gap.

Actually, I've been looking at this on new polls that come out, and there seems to, almost always, be no meaningful gender gap.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

White Millennials are just as bad as their parents: full scoop at 11.

Even though they are giving their vote overwhelmingly to Clinton? Ok.

[rafta_rafta]

Neither Trump nor Clinton would've won the primaries if only millenials voted. We'd probably be seeing a threeway race between Sanders, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson right now

[Boston Bread]

Neither Trump nor Clinton would've won the primaries if only millenials voted. We'd probably be seeing a threeway race between Sanders, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson right now

Clinton would have lost for sure. Among Millennials as a whole, she did as poorly as Bill Bradley. And among white Millennials, Clinton would have had John Wolfe/Russell Judd/Randall Terry 2012 numbers.

While Trump did do worse with Millennials than Rs as a whole, I'm not sure if he would have lost. He would still have won most contests due to a split Republican field, so it might have been decided by a contested convention.

[Young Conservative]

1. This is temporary.
2. They will get more conservative as they get older.
3. Marco Rubio can build a new American century.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

3. Marco Rubio can build a new American century.

This is a meaningless phrase from a man who stands for nothing.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Overall, it looks like Hillary will win young voters by roughly 15 points nationally, which is actually a lot closer than 2012, and wouldn't lead to that map.

[Green Line]

3. Marco Rubio can build a new American century.

This is a meaningless phrase from a man who stands for nothing.

He stands for all of us.

It's only meaningless because the ignoramuses in Florida denied Marco (and the nation) the opportunity to build it.  We will not be denied next time.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

3. Marco Rubio can build a new American century.

HAHAHA that boy?!?

[Hammy]

1. This is temporary.
2. They will get more conservative as they get older.

People get more conservative as they get older, yes, relative to the changing center-point of politics--some of the viewpoints themselves that were considered liberal 40 years ago are now mainstream while the mainstream views of that time are now conservative--people don't go backwards on their views as they get older.

[Green Line]

1. This is temporary.
2. They will get more conservative as they get older.

People get more conservative as they get older, yes, relative to the changing center-point of politics--some of the viewpoints themselves that were considered liberal 40 years ago are now mainstream while the mainstream views of that time are now conservative--people don't go backwards on their views as they get older.

They will this time.

[Bismarck]

I'm a bit surprised that white millennials in Indiana favor Clinton, but I would imagine a lot of GOP leaning white millennials like myself will be abstaining from either candidate this election.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Republican hacks can believe all they want that the millennials will come to them someday as they grow older. Even Frank Luntz can't deny reality.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Adam Griffin]

White Millennials are just as bad as their parents: full scoop at 11.

Even though they are giving their vote overwhelmingly to Clinton? Ok.

...except they're not? Obama only won 60% of all Millennials in 2012 and Romney actually won white Millennials. Look at the electoral map there: she's barely winning white Millennials relative to the group at-large. She has roughly the same EV share as she does nationally right now, in roughly the same states. I'm doubtful that she's running up the margins massively with them in all of the blue and swing states while just barely losing in all of the red states...which is what it'd take for it to be "overwhelmingly" in her favor.

Considering there is likely to be a higher-than-normal third-party preference among Millennials that I imagine is more evenly distributed between Johnson/Stein than among the country as a whole, she's probably not even above 50%; maybe 55-60% in the two-way vote. Even if it's something like 55/25/10/10, it's a mess. That's "overwhelming" only in a relative sense, and not really a meaningful one when it comes to my implication.

They will this time.

It has never happened. We do not live in special times or special places. We are not special snowflakes. It's not going to happen.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

White Millennials are just as bad as their parents: full scoop at 11.

Even though they are giving their vote overwhelmingly to Clinton? Ok.

...except they're not? Obama only won 60% of all Millennials in 2012 and Romney actually won white Millennials. Look at the electoral map there: she's barely winning white Millennials relative to the group at-large. She has roughly the same EV share as she does nationally right now, in roughly the same states. I'm doubtful that she's running up the margins massively with them in all of the blue/swing states while barely losing in the red states...which is what it'd take for it to be "overwhelmingly" in her favor.

Considering there is likely to be a higher-than-normal third-party preference among Millennials that I imagine is more evenly distributed between Johnson/Stein than among the country as a whole, she's probably not even above 50%; maybe 55% in the two-way vote. Even if it's something like 55/25/10/10, it's a mess. That's "overwhelming" only in a relative sense, and not really a meaningful one when it comes to my implication.

They will this time.

It has never happened. We do not live in special times or special places. We are not special snowflakes. It's not going to happen.

Thanks, Tyler.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

No third party results makes this a Horrible Map.