Are young voters really as Democratic as being portrayed?

[CJK]

One narrative I keep hearing is that one of the reasons the GOP is in trouble is because it is doing poorly with young people who are more supportive of the liberal agenda.

As a "young person" myself, I really don't think the GOP has "turned a generation against them" as it is commonly said. I think Republican problems in this area can largely be linked to Bush's failures and the fact that the media protected Obama for many disengaged voters. As these voters grow up they will become more politically saavy and lest reactive.

In other words I don't think that young people are exceptionally liberal, and that some of this is a function of the fact that their are more minorities in this group.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

One narrative I keep hearing is that one of the reasons the GOP is in trouble is because it is doing poorly with young people who are more supportive of the liberal agenda.

As a "young person" myself, I really don't think the GOP has "turned a generation against them" as it is commonly said. I think Republican problems in this area can largely be linked to Bush's failures and the fact that the media protected Obama for many disengaged voters. As these voters grow up they will become more politically saavy and lest reactive.

In other words I don't think that young people are exceptionally liberal, and that some of this is a function of the fact that their are more minorities in this group.

I've heard that they are exceptionally liberal on gay rights, but split on issues like abortion.

[Smash255]

Yes, young people generally are quite liberal, especially as it relates to gay rights and environmental issues.  Abortion is similar to other generations.  The years of Bush has certainly made young voters more Democratic, but the over the top hate breeding conservative movement within the GOP has made it even more so.

The current generation is going to be quite a bit more Democratic and liberal for some  time to come.  If the GOP moves in more of a Megan McCain type of direction perhaps they have a chance of getting a few young people back, and at least closing the gap somewhat (though it will still be overwhelmingly Democratic.  If not they will continue to get in even deeper and deeper with the young vote.

[Padfoot]

I agree with Smash.  The fact that the GOP is still promoting an anti-gay platform and openly opposing gay rights is simply laughable.  Its the worst long term strategy ever.  Countless polls have shown that the younger generations support gay rights by a significant margin.  This is a losing issue for the Republicans and it will only drag their party down.  Even Dick Cheney has realized this.

Republicans also have a terrible reputation on environmentalism and thanks to Bush/Cheney they have been heavily bogged down by associating themselves with big oil.  Yet another bad long term strategy as more and more Americans are looking for ways to reduce their impact on the environment and cut back on consumption of fossil fuels.

Until the GOP comes out with some reasonable ideas on the above issues they will continue to alienate the majority of young voters.

[ottermax]

While the Republicans could change the social strategy they may have already lost many voters that came of voting age this decade because of Bush. There was a chart I saw once on 538.com that showed how the popularity or unpopularity of a presidential administration affect the voting habits of that age group. Surprisingly older voters who came of age during Roosevelt remained strong supporters of Democrats even though they are probably more socially conservative than voters who came of age during the 80s and are avid supporters of the GOP. But the shock was how strongly this new generation of voters is loyal to the Democrats. Surely it will change as time goes on, but it will likely not change by much. I know that I will struggle to consider the Republicans in the future mainly because of Bush even if I agree with their policy.

[Vepres]

While the Republicans could change the social strategy they may have already lost many voters that came of voting age this decade because of Bush. There was a chart I saw once on 538.com that showed how the popularity or unpopularity of a presidential administration affect the voting habits of that age group. Surprisingly older voters who came of age during Roosevelt remained strong supporters of Democrats even though they are probably more socially conservative than voters who came of age during the 80s and are avid supporters of the GOP. But the shock was how strongly this new generation of voters is loyal to the Democrats. Surely it will change as time goes on, but it will likely not change by much. I know that I will struggle to consider the Republicans in the future mainly because of Bush even if I agree with their policy.

If Obama and/or the Democratic congress has a drastic failure, than the overly idealistic youth will become disenchanted with Democrats, and vote Republican. That's what happened with Gen X and Carter, no?

[Smash255]

While the Republicans could change the social strategy they may have already lost many voters that came of voting age this decade because of Bush. There was a chart I saw once on 538.com that showed how the popularity or unpopularity of a presidential administration affect the voting habits of that age group. Surprisingly older voters who came of age during Roosevelt remained strong supporters of Democrats even though they are probably more socially conservative than voters who came of age during the 80s and are avid supporters of the GOP. But the shock was how strongly this new generation of voters is loyal to the Democrats. Surely it will change as time goes on, but it will likely not change by much. I know that I will struggle to consider the Republicans in the future mainly because of Bush even if I agree with their policy.

If Obama and/or the Democratic congress has a drastic failure, than the overly idealistic youth will become disenchanted with Democrats, and vote Republican. That's what happened with Gen X and Carter, no?

In some instances perhaps, but Gen X generally came of age 5-10 years later during the Reagan era.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Youngs are so liberals because they aren't  locked up in a medieval way of thinking and they are able to reflect about issues instead of relying in their own prejudices.

[CJK]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

[ChrisJG777]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

Beyond this forum, people have very limited political knowledge.  When the image is portrayed by each party that Democrats are open minded and Republicans are traditional and religious, young people choose the Democrats.  An extreme minority of voters have nearly enough knowledge to make educated decisions on political matters.  The social issues have done us in because they're "uncool".  The Democratic Party is trendy and in touch with young people and can be easily accessed on college campuses and social networking sites, the Republican Party has elderly activists and can be found handing out brochures outside of churches and retirement homes.  Those are the people our parties have chosen to market to and those are the people that have become interested.

With young people I think it helps that they tend to be on average, more "impressionable", or so to speak, than older people.  I generally agree with the notion that if you want to attract a certain group to your cause, it helps if you speak their language; the Republican party, though down at the moment, does have a realistic chance, I feel, of getting back up again if finds ways of drawing younger people into its circle.  Using some of the Democratic party's methodology in drawing in the young voters, just adjusted for the Republican's message, could help initiate a resurgence of the Republican's in my opinion.  You just gotta make yourself appealing, that's the trick.

[Vepres]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

Beyond this forum, people have very limited political knowledge.  When the image is portrayed by each party that Democrats are open minded and Republicans are traditional and religious, young people choose the Democrats.  An extreme minority of voters have nearly enough knowledge to make educated decisions on political matters.  The social issues have done us in because they're "uncool".  The Democratic Party is trendy and in touch with young people and can be easily accessed on college campuses and social networking sites, the Republican Party has elderly activists and can be found handing out brochures outside of churches and retirement homes.  Those are the people our parties have chosen to market to and those are the people that have become interested.

With young people I think it helps that they tend to be on average, more "impressionable", or so to speak, than older people.  I generally agree with the notion that if you want to attract a certain group to your cause, it helps if you speak their language; the Republican party, though down at the moment, does have a realistic chance, I feel, of getting back up again if finds ways of drawing younger people into its circle.  Using some of the Democratic party's methodology in drawing in the young voters, just adjusted for the Republican's message, could help initiate a resurgence of the Republican's in my opinion.  You just gotta make yourself appealing, that's the trick.

Yeah, remember that Ron Paul got heavy youth support (though Republicans don't want him to be their face, I wouldn't either). I think the GOP could get the youth to be about evenly Republican and Democrat if they played their cards right.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Young voters are only extremly liberal on social issues, when it comes to economy I believe we're equally split. Even the young hard-core republicans I know support gay rights and enviorment for example.

I don't see this as a lasting trend. As ottermax pointed out, it's very much a generational thing. Those who were young during the 80's and the grand era of conservatism tend to be more republican while the younglings have been very democratic since Bill Clinton. In twenety to thirty years into the future the GOP might very well be the youth party while Democrats are the ones who have a strong base with middle-aged people. Of course the Republicans would have to get rid of the right-wing and their extreme ideas for that to happen.

And yes social issues are important, even if they're not the most important ones. I don't vote only based on what politicians think about those questions (if I did I would have been supporting Ron Paul not Obama) but they're still very important. I also know a girl who votes Republican only because she is opposed to gun control, even though she agrees with the Dems on basicly every other issue, so it workes the other way around too.       

[Smash255]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

What makes you think the support of young people for gay marriage isn't as much as some people want you to believe?  What do you think it is?  


The GOP has become the anti-gay, anti-environment party.  They aren't going to have a chance with young voters if they don't get away from that.

[CJK]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

What makes you think the support of young people for gay marriage isn't as much as some people want you to believe?  What do you think it is?  


The GOP has become the anti-gay, anti-environment party.  They aren't going to have a chance with young voters if they don't get away from that.

Well I'm a young person and I oppose gay marriage. I know many people that agree with me too. But many people who agree that it's wrong don't see any good reason to oppose it. Republicans need to flat out say something along the lines of "gays cannot naturally reproduce to create a family so their marriage is illegitimate and should not be recognized by the state" instead of taking the "sanctity of marriage" dodge. Or something like that.

[afleitch]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

What makes you think the support of young people for gay marriage isn't as much as some people want you to believe?  What do you think it is?  


The GOP has become the anti-gay, anti-environment party.  They aren't going to have a chance with young voters if they don't get away from that.

Well I'm a young person and I oppose gay marriage. I know many people that agree with me too. But many people who agree that it's wrong don't see any good reason to oppose it. Republicans need to flat out say something along the lines of "gays cannot naturally reproduce to create a family so their marriage is illegitimate and should not be recognized by the state" instead of taking the "sanctity of marriage" dodge. Or something like that.

But that doesn't explain it very well. I suppose that now my parents and grandparent are beyond child rearing age then their marriage should be invalidated. Or the family down the road who adopted, well they didn't 'naturally' reproduce did they? So their marriage would be invalid too.

[HAnnA MArin County]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

What makes you think the support of young people for gay marriage isn't as much as some people want you to believe?  What do you think it is?  


The GOP has become the anti-gay, anti-environment party.  They aren't going to have a chance with young voters if they don't get away from that.

Well I'm a young person and I oppose gay marriage. I know many people that agree with me too. But many people who agree that it's wrong don't see any good reason to oppose it. Republicans need to flat out say something along the lines of "gays cannot naturally reproduce to create a family so their marriage is illegitimate and should not be recognized by the state" instead of taking the "sanctity of marriage" dodge. Or something like that.

That's a weak argument. There are several straight couples (and plenty of old people) who cannot reproduce; should they not be allowed to marry either? The purpose of marriage is not to procreate. Marriage is about love, not gender. The Republicans really have no sound argument on which to base their opposition to gay marriage other than it's "wrong," "immoral," "disgusting," and "sinful," on which they point to the Bible and when you start injecting religion into politics, this is what turns young people off so much. I'm not saying that young people are overwhelmingly secular/atheist/agnostic/nonreligious, whatever term one chooses to use, but there is a sense among our generation to uphold the separation of church and state doctrine which DOES exist no matter how hard the conservatives try to argue differently.

Young people are considerably more liberal than the general population. I'm 23 and I am very liberal on the social issues but tend to be a bit more moderate on fiscal issues, and I'm more conservative on foreign policy issues (obvious to see now why I supported Hillary). I think the main reason my generation is more liberal than our parents' generation is simply because of nature. Youth has always had this reputation of rebelling against authority (in this case, the parents), which is a liberal philosophy in of itself. We've grown up where it's "cool" to question and challenge authority and the views promoted by our parents; again, another idea of liberalism. The social issues, though, are probably the most defining factor. Our generation has become much more tolerant and accepting of homosexuality (we go to school and work with gays and lesbians and we are not threatened or disgusted by them - it's considered "cool" among our generation to have a gay friend), and I would argue that a large number of people my age do support same-sex marriage. Evidence:

"A recent study by the Pew Research Center found that liberals are now the largest and fastest growing ideological group, while recent polls have found that young Americans are considerably more liberal than the general population. A slight majority, 56 percent, of those age 18 to 29 favor gay marriage, 68 percent state environmental protection to be as important as job creation, 52 percent "think immigrants 'strengthen the country with their hard work and talents,'" 62 percent favor 'tax financed, government-administrated universal health care' program and 74% "say 'people's will' should have more influence on U.S. laws than the Bible, compared to 37 percent, 49 percent, 38 percent, 47 percent and 58 percent among the general population."

Basically, young people don't like being told how we should live our lives, and since Republicans like to do that by telling us what we can and cannot do with our bodies and who we can and cannot have sex with, it's pretty obvious why we vote so Democratic.

[CJK]

Of course people eventually can't have kids, but that's not the same thing as never being able to have kids, like gays.

Basically, if your biological functions permitted you to have a child with your partner (whether or not that actually happens), its legitimate, otherwise, its not natural.

(In the case of cripples, it still would be legit if they could have had a kid in the absence of the physical disability.)

I believe the instituion of marriage is primarily about building a family.

Although I guess that does sound complicated.

Support for big government would not be as high if they were aware of the high costs involved.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Of course people eventually can't have kids, but that's not the same thing as never being able to have kids, like gays.

Basically, if your biological functions permitted you to have a child with your partner (whether or not that actually happens), its legitimate, otherwise, its not natural.

(In the case of cripples, it still would be legit if they could have had a kid in the absence of the physical disability.)

I believe the instituion of marriage is primarily about building a family.

Although I guess that does sound complicated.

Support for big government would not be as high if they were aware of the high costs involved.

I don't want to turn this into a gay marriage forum, but your argument about never being able to have kids is still pretty weak. Like I said, there are several straight couples who are not able to have children because of infertility. Does this mean they shouldn't be allowed to marry either? Nowhere in the marriage vows does it say "I will have children." And what about several old people who haven't been married their entire lives and have no family but wait until their 60s or 70s to get married when they're obviously past their child-bearing years; should they not be allowed to get married either because they can't build a family? I had a college algebra professor who was in her 60s and hadn't been married her entire life and had no children but met a man on the Internet and they recently got married but they obviously can't have children; should their marriage be invalidated all because of that? They love each other and are happy together; what's wrong with that? It all depends on your definition of a family. You don't have to have children to be considered a family. A couple (a man and a woman, two men and/or two women) that is happy and in love basically serves the function of a family. And for all these couples who aren't able to have children (the gays and infertile straight couples), there's always adoption. There are so many children wanting and needing a home where they can be loved and nurtured by caring individuals. Adoption is clearly not natural either; should we eliminate it as well and just say, "Sorry kids. Your parents made a mistake and abandoned you and now you're on your own because we can't place you with your non-biological parents because it's not 'natural.'" Of course not.

Having children in your marriage is a choice, not an obligation. I see your point but strongly disagree with it. Everybody wants somebody to grow old with, and shouldn't everyone have that right? It all boils down to commitment and love, not procreation and children. "Love never fails."

[Smash255]

I honestly don't believe there is any evidence that social issues are to blame. Sure, young people support gay marriage (though not as much as some want us to believe). So? Who steps into the voting booth and votes on gay marriage?

I don't think the Republicans have to scrap these social issues, they just need to do a better job in explaining them.

What makes you think the support of young people for gay marriage isn't as much as some people want you to believe?  What do you think it is?  


The GOP has become the anti-gay, anti-environment party.  They aren't going to have a chance with young voters if they don't get away from that.

Well I'm a young person and I oppose gay marriage. I know many people that agree with me too. But many people who agree that it's wrong don't see any good reason to oppose it. Republicans need to flat out say something along the lines of "gays cannot naturally reproduce to create a family so their marriage is illegitimate and should not be recognized by the state" instead of taking the "sanctity of marriage" dodge. Or something like that.

That is retarded.  Many people get married past child baring ages.  Others simply can't have kids.  Virtually every single poll has gay marriage support at or around 60% for young people.  This really isn't even an argument, its every single poll.  You might not agree with it, but the majority of those in our age rage do (I'm 27 not sure how old you are) and that is simply a cold hard fact.  Unless you consider you and a few of your friends to be a better barometer than every single poll.

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

Depends on what part of the country you're living in. Pretty much the way it has been for eons.

[Mint]

Depends on what part of the country you're living in. Pretty much the way it has been for eons.

Not really. Gen X was and still is much more Republican leaning than the rest of the population. Actually if you look at Pew's collected polls the GOP had a narrow edge among people between the ages of 18 and 39 in 1992 and was roughly neck and neck up until the middle of this decade when those numbers plummeted. If we had someone more competent than Bush we probably would have surpassed those numbers.

[pbrower2a]

What Howe and Strauss define as the Millennial Generation (born 1982 until at least 2000) now seems much more libertarian on sexuality and reproductive rights (which is normal for all youth generations) than its elders... and economics, which is not to be assumed about youth. Generation X was more right-leaning than its elders on economics, believing Corporate America very trustworthy well into the 1980s. It voted as if it had a stake in the enhancement of corporate power.

The Millennial Generation acts as if it has little stake in capitalism as it sees it.  Think of what it has seen: American capitalism at its absolute worst -- an economic order that offers neither equity, security, not potential for personal growth.  At best American capitalism offers conditional survival with the goodies going to people who have no empathy for any subordinate. The few who have started businesses aren't likely making enough money to be concerned as much with taxes as with revenues. It as also seen American right-wing religion at its worst, with obnoxious personalities trying to force superstition (like creationism) and sexual repression onto them. It's a good thing that America has little heritage of Socialist or Communist movements -- or else we might see the bloating of Far Left groups.

It enters adulthood with huge student loans to pay off, so it begins its working ages sympathetic to inflation as a solution for meeting the burden of debt. Beginning in the middle of this decade it has found itself priced out of home ownership -- only to see the collapse of a corrupt boom take down much of the American economy. It has seen the bloated incomes of executives while wages freeze and jobs disappear -- and executives crack the whip as their grandparents never knew. If it has been attending high school between 2001 and 2008 it has heard history and civics teachers compare Dubya to other Presidents -- and not well. It has cause to believe that the best for America is in the past lest there be extensive reforms. Because Communism is a moribund or at the most stagnant ideology and no threat, it has not seen any Red Scare propaganda that tends to make people more conservative than they otherwise might be.

The President that it best knows (at least until January 2009) is of course George W. Bush... and even with Bill Clinton it recognizes that the Republican-dominated Congress called the shots. Dubya was not the sort of President to serve as an introduction of American politics at the best. Earlier generations at least know Ronald Reagan.

Meanwhile the Hard Right has been taking over the Republican Party -- and squeezing out the moderates.

The Millennial Generation will become more conservative as time passes, especially as it gets something worth protecting from radical schemes of redistribution and international threats. Some will have lucrative practices in law, medicine, accountancy, and the like -- but they rarely have those yet. Some will own successful businesses that project them into the Economic Right. Some will have stable and well-paying careers in private industry. When such is true of their generation, more of it will drift toward the Right. Until then it has no obvious interest in the promotion of capitalism at its most rapacious and ruthless -- or the superstitions of the Religious Right.

Until the GOP rediscovers moderate conservatism and drops fear of high taxes, immigrants, and homosexuality, and abandons its contempt for the intellect, it will continue to shrink . Whether it survives until the Millennial Generation finds something to preserve from radical assault remains without obvious resolution.

[Rob]

the Republican party, though down at the moment, does have a realistic chance, I feel, of getting back up again if finds ways of drawing younger people into its circle. 

Yo. Michael Steele knows how to connect with kids, dawg. His shizzle is off da hook!

just stick with him and the GOP will triumph.

[Mechaman]

First off this is my first post so hi guys! I've been trying to get a membership on this forum for months (dead serious). This seems like the only place on the internet where people can have sane rational discusssions without getting jackhammered by loons.

Now onto the topic:
Yes I really do think that young voters are becoming more Democratic. I say this as someone who's lived in Oklahoma for 16 years. Now my state is a bit batty when it comes to social issues, so batty that a moderate conservative leaning Democrat who runs against the incumbent Republican is deemed a "far left liberal". Hell, the "Big L" Libertarians are probably more liberal than the Democrats in this state!
Now onto the point, as conservative of a state as Okiehoma is I do notice among the young people it seems they're half and half on social issues, if not more socially liberal. Of course a majority of them seem to be pretty conservative on economics but socially, they're semi moderate. Overall I'd call them "moderate leaning conservatives".
But then again I've lived in the pretty urban areas of Oklahoma (Tulsa, Edmond) most of my life so the story may be pretty different in the rural areas, I'm just decribing how I perceive these people first hand.
Now, if the youth in Oklahoma, a VERY SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE STATE, are trending more towards liberal social views than conservative, that is a statement on the general youth's perception of social issues in the US. The youth in this nation are more socially liberal than any generation that came before it and thus they're going to favor the party that is the more socially liberal on issues: the Democrats.
On economic issues since it was under a Republican regime that the economy started to go sour I think the youth will probably go with "option b". Plus, they tend to be a bit more idealistic than previous generations on issues like welfare, universal healthcare, and other pretty liberal ideas. Just a thought.

And is there a reason why this post appears at the top of the topic?

[Daniel Z]

Social Issues and the Bush foregin policy are probably the leading contributors for the strong Democratic lean among younger voters. While I don't think my generation has moved to the left on abortion (even many secular libs are pro-life) like previous posters said the Republicans are getting murdered on issues such as gay marriage and environmental protection. I don't think the Democrats are hurt as badly among young people who are pro-life or pro-gun because unlike the Republicans the Democrat's don't put much emphasis on their controversial social position, which makes it easier for pro life or pro gun people to support Democrats anyways.  Economics are similar, I don't think my generation is particularly left wing on economic issues (although I may be biased as an economics major), but again I don't think think the Democrats come off as lunatic leftist on economics, which makes it more likely for us to vote based off of areas such as the environment or foreign policy where we are more likely to side with the Democrats.