Survey: Republican Support Collapses Among Youth

[Tender Branson]

A major, multi-mode survey of America’s young people recently conducted by Democracy Corps shows young people profoundly alienated from the Republican Party and poised to deliver a significant majority to the Democratic nominee for President in 2008. The political stakes with this generation could not be higher.

In 2008, young people (ages 18-31) will number 50 million, bigger than the baby boom generation. By 2015 they will likely comprise one-third of the U.S. electorate. While participation among young people still lags well behind other generations, turnout increased two election cycles in a row and, in 2004, jumped nine points (to 49 percent). In 2004, younger voters were the only generational cohort outside of the World War II generation to support John Kerry (56 percent). In 2006, younger voters supported Democrats by a 60 – 38 percent margin, the highest of any generation.

The looming disaster Republicans face among younger voters represents a setback that could haunt them for many generations to come. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama lead Rudy Giuliani—the most acceptable of the Republican offerings among youth—by significant margins, assembling a diverse coalition of support and leading the vote among independents.

Exploring attitudes toward the parties themselves, young voters’ reaction to fundamental issues and their perceptions of the GOP suggest a fundamental alienation from the Republican Party, a crisis that will not leave with the Bush administration.

Young people react with hostility to the Republicans on almost every measure and Republicans and younger voters disagree on almost every major issue of the day. The range of the issue disagreements range from the most prominent issues of the day (Iraq, immigration) to burning social issues (gay marriage, abortion) to fundamental ideological disagreements over the size and scope of government.

Story continues ...

http://democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_July_27_2007_Youth_Memo.pdf

http://democracycorps.com/reports/surveys/Democracy_Corps_May_29-June_29_2007_Youth_Survey.pdf

[Person Man]

Yeah, but there have been some populist conservative movements that have canceled out, but not overshadowed  some gains. The momentum is in full swing, but there are still debates to win.

[Frodo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A minor question -isn't the Baby Boomer generation somewhere around 78 million or so, according to mainstream publications like Newsweek?   

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A minor question -isn't the Baby Boomer generation somewhere around 78 million or so, according to mainstream publications like Newsweek?   

Depends on how you define Baby Boomers.

[Reluctant Republican]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

The Democratic party is the fiscally responsible party.

[??????????]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

Yes, and obviously when we have a Democratic president terrorism will magically go away and all the youth will pick wildflowers while the lamb and lion will lay together in magical peace and harmony.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Not at all surprising.

It should also be noted that the younger generation is known as the next "civic" generation, replacing the passing "Greatest Generation", and these "civic" generations tend to have more trust in government and institutions and often support social groups.  I've read a lot about it in a book called "Bowling Alone"

I hope my generation can get America back to being a nation that knows and socializes with neighbors, holds neighborhood BBQs, and joins organizations that cater to their interests.  Maybe we can be the "us" generation.

[bullmoose88]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

Yes, and obviously when we have a Democratic president terrorism will magically go away and all the youth will pick wildflowers while the lamb and lion will lay together in magical peace and harmony.

The Orioles will win a World Series in that scenario too.

:-p

[Ban my account ffs!]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

Yes, and obviously when we have a Democratic president terrorism will magically go away and all the youth will pick wildflowers while the lamb and lion will lay together in magical peace and harmony.

Unfortunately, terrorism will not cease with a Democratic president.  But people like you inhabiting the oval office certainly will!  Perhaps it is possible to fight terrorism without the "my penis is bigger than yours" strategy and it might even be possible that you could fight to squelch terrorism in the world AND look at taking care of and promoting the success of that which you are defending.

A question that comes to mind when I see all this "war on terrorism" crap is:  What exactly are we defending?  A teetering democracy where freedom is defended abroad while chipped away at at home?  An economy that favors a few lucky souls and takes away from the rest of us?  Our choice to buy 80 different kinds of jeans all made in 3rd world countries by small children?  Our ability to poison ourselves and our pets with non-inspected food made in China?

[angus]

After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

possibly the most interesting response.  Actually, as I read the article I thought that it meant good news for the Libertarians as well.  But the author apparently interpreted a GOP defection as an automatic Democrat gain.  The large percentage for Kerry may stem from suspicion of Bush, and taken alone without turnout/elegibility percentages can't be as meaningful as the author implies.  I'd at least have inserted the phrase "and other" after Democratic in the first sentence.  Then again, as we have often discussed on this forum, "legitimate news organizations" needn't be unbiased. 

Still, it all makes sense given the stark contrast between the small-government, non-interfering, strict constructionist Candidate Bush and the monumental follies of the real President Bush.  I can't imagine any truly conservative young person going for Karl Rove's big government in sheep's clothing yet a third time around.  And if the DNC is only alternative which may reasonably be taken seriously by young voters, then the Democrats need only to channel their energies in such a way as to turn out that vote.  Historically, however, that's not an easy thing to do.

[Reluctant Republican]

That’s a shame, but Its not that much of a surprise. If the Republican party was actually still fiscally responsible and if it had any Libertarian positions on social issues left, we’d still have a base. But really, what youth wants to support a big government, hawkish, socially authoritarian party? There are some yes, especially with the big government part, but as youth is a time of rebellion, it makes sense that most young people would oppose the party that is seen as supporting authority and control. If you notice the Democratic candidates for president, they are all talking about change, like repealing the Patriot act, repealing don’t ask don’t tell, and ending the war, and this message appeals to the young of America. The Republicans on the other hand talk about confronting terrorism, being tough with other countries, and pretty much keeping Bush’s policy, except trying to implement it much more successfully. That message is really hard to get excited about, especially since it might mean more war, and its the young who often go to fight the wars.

But anyway even I, a lifelong Republican have never been this demoralized. As it is now, the only reason I’m sticking with the GOP is economic issues, at least based on principle.  After this next election I may bail out entirely and become a Libertarian. 

Yes, and obviously when we have a Democratic president terrorism will magically go away and all the youth will pick wildflowers while the lamb and lion will lay together in magical peace and harmony.

No, but look at the message both parties promote. The Republicans Continue to talk about the war on terror and winning the war on Iraq, basically saying that more sacrifice is needed. The Democrats talk about ending the war and focusing on domestic policy, while only going after nations that attack us. Hell, the Democrats now have the optimistic message while the Republicans are stuck with the stay the course rhetoric. And under that circumstance, who do you think the youth would go for? Of course, it does not help that the Republicans suck at delivering their message while the Democrats are good at the rhetoric.

[Ebowed]

Yes, and obviously when we have a Democratic president terrorism will magically go away and all the youth will pick wildflowers while the lamb and lion will lay together in magical peace and harmony.

People are tired of these scare tactics.  You supported abusing civil liberties, torturing people, invading countries that were no threat to us.  All in the name of "terrorism."

Time to find a new thing to blame for all of the world's problems, States.

[Keystone Phil]

The Democrats talk about ending the war and focusing on domestic policy, while only going after nations that attack us. Hell, the Democrats now have the optimistic message while the Republicans are stuck with the stay the course rhetoric.

Of course they talk. That's all it is. Great that they have an optimistic message...but where is the action? Remember how they were going to end this war?

[Ebowed]

Remember how they were going to end this war?

Yeah, the Democrats are a joke.  They could end the war now if they really wanted to.

[Reluctant Republican]

The Democrats talk about ending the war and focusing on domestic policy, while only going after nations that attack us. Hell, the Democrats now have the optimistic message while the Republicans are stuck with the stay the course rhetoric.

Of course they talk. That's all it is. Great that they have an optimistic message...but where is the action? Remember how they were going to end this war?

That's why there's such Intense dislike of the two major parties in the electorate. Wasn’t there a poll that said like 36 percent or something wanted a third party?  But if the public does want the war over there not going to back the Republicans. Most people will end up supporting the lesser of two evils, which most people right now see as the Democrats.

[AkSaber]

This is no surprise. I would imagine the GOP's support in just about every demographic has fallen since the 2004 elections.

[??????????]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Republicans are evil and anti-american. J. Edgar Hoover's idea of internment camps in the desert may be useful to deal with the most hardcore conservatives.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

Do you ever say anything non-hackish?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

Do you ever say anything non-hackish?

No. I am admitted troll and states has said less non-hackish things than me yet people bitch about my posting.

[??????????]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

Do you ever say anything non-hackish?

History backs me up, prove me wrong, thx.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

Do you ever say anything non-hackish?

History backs me up, prove me wrong, thx.

No. History backs Gully on this.

[Tender Branson]

The Democrats may "end" the war on our side if they get into office but that doesn't mean the religion of Islam will cease to be the bloodthirsty religion it has been since 680AD.

Well, it took Christianity 2000 years before the Pope and Co. announced: "Killing witches, ass-shaggers, red-hairs and crusading around the world beating up simple disbelievers ain´t really that much fun !"

Islam therefore has 500-600 years left to set a better example and I doubt you´ll be the one to see the result ...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Converting the middle east at nukepoint would be amusing.