Pew: Dems Losing Millennial Edge
That’s the AP take-away from a new Pew Research report (pdf) released today. From the Executive Summary:
Politically, Millennials were among Barack Obama’s strongest supporters in 2008, backing him for president by more than a two-to-one ratio (66% to 32%) while older adults were giving just 50% of their votes to the Democratic nominee. This was the largest disparity between younger and older voters recorded in four decades of modern election day exit polling. Moreover, after decades of low voter participation by the young, the turnout gap in 2008 between voters under and over the age of 30 was the smallest it had been since 18- to 20-year-olds were given the right to vote in 1972. (Chapter 8).
But the political enthusiasms of Millennials have since cooled —for Obama and his message of change, for the Democratic Party and, quite possibly, for politics itself. About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works, which had been the central promise of his candidacy. Of those who say this, three-in-ten blame Obama himself, while more than half blame his political opponents and special interests.
To be sure, Millennials remain the most likely of any generation to self-identify as liberals; they are less supportive than their elders of an assertive national security policy and more supportive of a progressive domestic social agenda. They are still more likely than any other age group to identify as Democrats. Yet by early 2010, their support for Obama and the Democrats had receded, as evidenced both by survey data and by their low level of participation in recent off-year and special elections. (Chapter 8).
Business Week reads the same 149 page report (which I have not read) differently — Younger Americans Cite Liberalism as Defining Aspect:
Those aged 18 to 29 cited technology use, music/pop culture and liberalism/tolerance as the three top characteristics that most make them unique from other age groups.
The slant toward liberalism showed in their support of government — 53 percent of them said government should do more to solve problems, compared with 45 percent of those aged 30-45, 43 percent of those aged 46-64, and 39 percent of those 65 and older.
The characteristic also showed in party affiliation. Among the younger age group, 41 percent identified as Democrats, while 32 percent classified themselves as independents and 22 percent as Republicans. That was the largest percentage of Democratic Party supporters among any of the age groups.
More coverage of the report:
- WaPo — Despite recession, young people optimistic about future
- USA Today — Millennial generation more educated, less employed
- Chicago Tribune — ‘Millennials’ dubbed ‘always connected’ generation
- MSNBC — ‘Millennials’ an always on, texting generation
A live video webcast of Pew’s Millennials conference will be available here at at 9:00 AM today. Here Pew’s demographic portrait of four generations. Here the how “Millennial” are you quiz. While my birth date makes me a baby boomer, my score (47) places me as a solid Gen Xer. More texting, tattoos and piercings would have lifted my score.
Share This
Related Posts
-
For the GOP, Ignorance Is Bliss
Posted on Feb 12, 2013
-
R and R (Romney and Ryan)’s Vision For America
Posted on Aug 27, 2012
-
Pew: Democrats and Independents Support Gay Marriage
Posted on Aug 1, 2012
-
Whale Hunting Protects Marine Life – and Japanese Culture: Nishi Nippon, Japan
Posted on Mar 8, 2011
Hmm…I think I've already seen this graph on TMV.
Yes, I thought so too. But the report came out today and I couldn't find it when I searched the site. Point me to it?
The concern has to do with disillusionment and opting out of the process, and who could blame them? The politics of obstruction aren't for the faint of heart. Not much here for the right to feel good about, since the M's aren't exactly moving in that direction. It's a lose – lose scenario. My millennial score? I racked up a solid 9.
http://themoderatevoice.com/63611/poll-democrat…
Apparently Joe gets inside info from his CNN contacts
The question is….is he selling out TMV to get it!?!?!??!?!
“Millennial generation more educated, less employed”
Fix that problem and watch the votes roll in.
Politics of obstruction? — doubt it. Few people are buying what either side is selling is more like it. On the other hand, it looks like they're still swinging between arsenic and cyanide, but that may be due to the nature of the poll.
Bravo Joe! Thanks shannonlee for pointing to it for me. You've got better TMV search skills than I do… Sorry for the retread, folks, but I'll just
assumehope it's worth a revisit.I see a 1 year 20 point swing from leaning left to leaning right. They may not be buying what Reps are selling, but they are moving in their direction.
It is possible that they are just no longer in love with Obama. Now that they have figured out that the wizard of Oz is just a man…they have returned to normal patterns.
I honestly doubt it. 50% blamed Obama's opponents (aka the Republicans) for the lack of change in Washington. They won't switch sides. They just won't show up.
Think about it. They don't support an aggressive foreign policy (opposite of the Republican view). They are secular, socially liberal, and completely comfortable with cultural diversity (opposite of the Republican view). They aren't anti-government, but they are against running big deficits. The Republicans could have had an opening here, if they hadn't blown it for the last 8 years (and are still blowing it by obstructing cuts to medicare).
My score was a 72, by the way.
“It is possible that they are just no longer in love with Obama.”
That's part of it. “Where are the rainbows and unicorns and perfection? Where is our pixie dust?”
The other part is more general disillusionment. Much can be written off to immaturity and ignorance, part of it is just like all the others on the farther left — the ones who said the Dems should have done more and been farther left last year, and they believe that is still the solution now. (They say so all the time. They're the ones most insistent on progress on legislation, and the few that are politically aware want legislation rammed past the GOP opposition.) In addition to impatience or anger at the lack of progress, the other reaction (based on disillusionment with the Dems, not with Obama), that some far lefty talkers have (I believe rightly) noted is a risk of the Dems' not making progress (as well as neglecting the farther left part of the electorate, not limited to the younger people, in the content of the legislation they try to pass). The risk is that many lib or Dem voters will become apathetic. (That is a possibility that was feared after earlier elections, and reinforced after the Massachusetts election.)
The Dems are in trouble because they need to make progress with legislation or suffer apathy or rejection by disappointed as well as disillusioned more-mainstream voters, but even though if they go farther left they will start losing mainstream votes, they cannot neglect this farther-left contingent, for if they do, they'll disillusion them and worse, and risk losing a lot of votes from these people. It's their challenge.
I suppose if the alternative to going “farther-left” was something useful or worthwhile, and not just a return to wornout downward status quo policies and behavior, then it might be more appealing. If there aren't any viable alternatives to non-attainable progress, or cynical defense of further stagnation, then we have lost our mettle as a nation – a judgement that isn't very hard to make I'm afraid.
But this poll isn't about showing up. It appears that even though the Mill kids are all of the things you listed….they have been moving towards leaning Reps this year.
I mean…unless these questions were terrible…you can't discount the polls numbers.
From the Pew pdf:
“About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works”
I wonder what they wanted instead. Some kind of national (later, global) Ken Livingstone's London or Gavin Newsome's San Francisco? [chuckling]
It's worth mentioning here as I have on another thread that Pew just released a very instructive as well as a timely report on the current state of affairs in this country. It includes Obama's flat ratings, how people view basic current political events, and how they view the parties, all kinds of goodies.
(You'll smile at the basic characterization of the two parties based on most common descriptors.)
http://people-press.org/report/589/midterm-elec…
The Reps have been making noise about the deficit, which is attractive. The ones who have been paying attention know it is BS. By election season, many of the ones who haven't been paying much attention will know it is BS, too. They will just stay home. I interpret this to mean the Dems are losing support, not that the Reps are really gaining it. To genuinely attract a good number of Mills in the Rep corner, they would have to become a LOT less Jerry Falwell and a LOT more Ron Paul. Of course, if the Reps made that swing, they would lose the Silent Generation and the social cons in the other generations.
Another nice link…and interesting poll.
“To genuinely attract a good number of Mills in the Rep corner, they would have to become a LOT less Jerry Falwell and a LOT more Ron Paul. Of course, if the Reps made that swing, they would lose the Silent Generation and the social cons in the other generations.”
And that is already happening, but it is incremental at best. Maybe it will be enough to be felt in '16, but the Dems will probably lose '12 just through good old fashioned incompetence of their own.
The other incremental effect helping the R's will be that “Mills” will evolve to be less nanny-state protagonists as they move into middle age and want to be more protective of their own wealth accumulation prospects.
That's an extremely optimistic attitude. The M's are suffering an unemployment rate now much, much higher than the population at large. That “wealth accumulation” will no doubt take place among some of them, but enough to steer them toward a keep-your-hands-off-my-stack mentality? I doubt it.
Spitting in the eye of younger people in order to appease baby-boomers makes young people apathetic.
Is this news, now? This is the fault of the careerist dems in congress.
Joe I really enjoyed the poll and quiz. As I gather from my friends-from-childhood, I am frequently described as being part of Glenn Beck's “disease,” a progressive-leaning politic but with some old fashioned values. I scored 11 on the quiz, which puts me about in the right place: a baby boomer born in 1961.
I agree with others speculating whether or not this is a reflection of apathy toward the whole process. Just watch the Texas political season and you'll see what I mean.
“I suppose if the alternative to going 'farther-left' was something useful or worthwhile to the country as a whole [...]“
Well, plenty of us have provided innumerable examples for corrections and improvements, even if their utility and their other advantages have been ignored or rejected (often predictably and sadly). But you get a concession for implying the obvious, that the alternative is the current Republican Party.
Unfortunately, the farther-left threat is so unpalatable that many in November may vote Republican anyway, out of a need for relief or (as in 2006 and 2008 against the GOP, something the far Left has missed) to punish the Dems for betraying the trust we risked with them.
We'll see…
It's possible I missed the “innumerable examples” that were buried under the demonic characterizations.
. As for the “farther-left threat”, I've yet to see anything I'd call a “threat”, but the voters will swing back and forth for the same reasons they always do – short attention spans.
Query, how do two liberals score 9 and 11 while a corporate fat-cat oligarch scores 38? Do you folks not yet have electricity out there yet?
I am going to have to agree with JSpencer on this one. Pretty much every strongly conservative, strongly anti-nanny state member of my family all have generous pension or retirement benefits. Most of them get their benefits from either state or the federal government (half of that is military). Of course, they think they deserve those generous benefits and somehow, those benefits aren't counted in the big government nanny-state equation. The ones that are finally above 65, complain about taxes and social security all the way to the bank, where they cash their government checks. These anti-tax, anti-government people have spent much of their lives trashing the safety they are using to stay afloat. They have never really had to worry about being poor, desperate, or unable to get medical care.
I, on the other hand, worry about it alot. I know they are trashing the safety net, making it unsustainable. I am great now. I'm smart, well educated, and have a great career. But I am saving my money like crazy, because I know that you become less employable in your 50's. Unlike my relatives, I won't have any retirement income other than what I earn now. I can't count on staying healthy. No one can. Healthcare can bankrupt you. It am afraid for my future.
I am not anti-government or anti-tax. I believe in having a safety net. But I also think it needs to be reserved for people who truly need it, who truly need help. Most 60-70 year olds are healthy enough to be working at least part time. They are taking advantage of younger tax payers. I want that to stop, but I am not naive enough to think that I might not need help some day.
Test sucks (cause I only got a 3). How can you score a eagle tat for a 65 year-old marine and a series of Chinese characters for a twenty something, equally?
Duck, you make me feel pretty young with my 9.
“to become a LOT less Jerry Falwell and a LOT more Ron Paul.”
More like Ralph Nader and youth-minded Dem welfare-statists, I'd say:
* Lower the voting age to sixteen
* Develop an early-adulthoood “emanicipation” legal concept (go, Marion Wright Edelman, go)
* Provide a set of youth entitlements (driver's insurance subsidies or government substitute for private insurance, school living stipends as well as tuition assistance [a complete welfare package for students partially in high school and completely after high school, in higher education]. Ideal is unrealistic but a clear goal: a “Social Security” and lifestyle maintenance for high school kids and young adults.
(These are the people other than children and the elderly, that are temporal cohorts of the population and may be approached specifically — piecemeal, probably in a sequential manner, as the sequence best shows itself to be created — as part of a universalist cradle-to-grave entitlement-based welfare state construction strategy. The other group to which the welfare state is directed is the original one, the poor.)
I got a 48, for whatever that's worth. Based on who I see getting what on this thread, it's intriguing.
And I guess I should feel even younger with a 15. though in reality, it makes me feel very old some days. As a solid Gen X'er born in 1970, I always knew that I was born far too late, and would have fared much better in the 'Leave it to Beaver' days. (Even the crap in the 60's p*sses me off – talk about a wasted decade. Yes, I know much 'was accomplished', but the methodology used to create the advancements, were way off. And seriously, we are better off now, HOW?)
CO:
I thought that was funny too. I would have thought I'd be closer to a Millineal, but I still read a newspaper, don't watch much TV, don't have tatoos or pierced body part, have written to my congressperson, have a cell phone (my son calls it a “brick” because it doesn't do anything much more than allow me to talk,) don't have texting, don't have a MySpace profile or “social networking,” unless we count THIS as social networking, don't play video games although I'm not critical of them, have a land line, my parents were married (although not happily,) worked hard to have a good career and consider it important, don't care who marries who, and don't think it helps or hurts society either way, and consider myself “liberal,” don't care about religious dogma much, except to the degree it affects the public square.
But I don't seem to have much in common with the newest generation after all. I'm an old fart.
Good link, DLS.
“About half of Millennials say the president has failed to change the way Washington works”
I consider it virtually impossible for any Washington insider to change Washington. This is true for both parties. This is why governors are best suited for the Presidency and NOT Senators or Representatives. I'm not saying that there weren't a few dud governor-presidents, but most have been good for both parties.
You cannot cure cancer with a dose of cancer.
Perhaps the Millenials are realizing that.
The test scored me as a 29.
I'm apparently not even a good “Gen X'er”, as it placed me toward the “Boomer” range, but still solidly Gen-X.
The electronic gadgetry and communicating must be weighted heavily. On the belief system, we score the same……..and I even entered moderate to your liberal.
Someday, I sincerely hope you are exposed to people who walk the walk…..as I would be more than satisfied if you gave me back just my FICA and self-employment contributions (not a penny more) and you could cut me out of any govt dole liability calculation tomorrow…….I believe in my abilities that much that I would gladly live or die by them.
I think that's the only reason I scored so high (66), when I'm on the borderline between GenX and boomer.
I'm smack in the middle of the pack boomer – but a closer fit would probably have been mid 19th century.
Yeah, agree with that.
” I would be more than satisfied if you gave me back just my FICA and self-employment contributions (not a penny more) and you could cut me out of any govt dole liability calculation tomorrow…….I believe in my abilities that much that I would gladly live or die by them.”
OUTSTANDING statement CO….. Outstanding!