Why Republicans Should Be Really, Really, Really Scared

by: dreaminonempty

Sat Nov 14, 2009 at 08:00


So, 90% of McCain's support came from whites, and 89% came from Christians, but the country is getting less white, and less Christian, and even whites and Christians are voting more and more for Democrats.  

That sentence should set any Republican sweating.  But here's the number that should send them crawling under the covers and whimpering: 66.  66% of those aged 18-29 voted for Obama last November.  If only people this age had voted, Obama would have about 40 states and somewhere around 469 electoral votes, according to exit polls.  Including Mississippi.  And Arizona.

Here's the chart, and the map:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

dreaminonempty :: Why Republicans Should Be Really, Really, Really Scared
More than Demographic Change

The first thing we might think is that young people voted more Democratic because they are less white and less Christian than any previous generation, something we've touched on before in this series.  

But while that is true, young people within almost every demographic also voted more Democratic than their elders in 2008:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

There are two exceptions - African Americans, where the trend is essentially flat, and Jewish voters, where youngsters are slightly more likely to vote Republican (similar to what was seen in 2004).  Even White Evangelicals have more Democratic youngsters.

Geography and the Age Gap

The difference between the youngest and oldest generations is greatest where the demographic difference between the generations is greatest:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Data for whites alone show less of a geographic trend, although the numbers are more squirrely because of smaller sample sizes:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

But They'll Grow More Conservative...

Maybe.  But in last forty years or so, that hasn't been the case, according to an analysis of the changes in attitudes towards minorities and privacy issues over a thirty year time period.  Indeed, we can directly observe this politically by looking at exit polls over the same time period.

We start with 1972: Nixon won all age brackets, but McGovern pulled in 46% of those aged 18-29, compared with 31-33% for all other age groups.  In 2008, this same cohort, now 54-65, voted approximately 50% for Obama.  Obviously, those young idealist hippies abandoned their utopian nonsense as they aged, paid taxes, and raised families.  Oh wait...  they didn't, did they?

Below is the graph for the political behavior of three age cohorts from the 1972 election: 18-29, 30-44, and 45-59.  Note that for later elections, age ranges do not perfectly match:  for instance, the data for those aged 50-64 in 2008 is used to represent the cohort that was 18-29 in 1972, even though their actual ages ranged from 54-65 in 2008.  Older data can be found in the New York Times.

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

What we see is that people from all age groups have tended to vote more Democratic as the years go by - and the biggest changes have come among the older voters.  Those older than 30 in 1972 supported Reagan in 1984 far less than they supported Nixon in 1972.  And they supported Bush and McCain even less than that.

Part of this can be attributed to immigration, but only a small part.  Looking at the immigration numbers, if we assume that naturalized citizens vote at the same rate as everybody else and all of them vote for Democrats (which is not true), then the 18-29 cohort from 1972 should have become 2 points more Democratic by 2008.

But what about the Reagan generation?  Youth from the 1980s have also grown a little more Democratic:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

But here's another but: the 2008 election is different, coming on the heels of a disastrous administration that sent people scurrying away from toxic Republican label.  Maybe it's more like the 1976 election, and we all know what happened in 1980.  Here's what happened to two 1976 cohorts:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Although they swung towards conservatives, by this decade they were pretty close to where they started.  

So over the past few decades, different age cohorts have generally become more Democratic, or stayed about the same at the presidential level.  That doesn't mean the same thing will happen over the next thirty years, but it does mean that it's simply not true that people become more conservative as they age.

________________________________________________
This diary is the sixteenth in a series taking a close look at the 2008 electorate and exploring three themes: diversity within demographics, progressive feedback loops, and demographic change.  

Previous diaries:

Looking Back
Alternate History
Why Republicans Should Be Really Scared
African-Americans - We Are Not All of Us Alike
East and South Asian Americans - Diverse and Growing
West Asian Americans - Rapid Change
Native Americans - Increasing Participation
Islander Americans - In Need of More Representation
Alaskan Natives - An Economic Factor?
Latino Americans - Increasing Influence
European Americans - Tribal Politics Persist
"American" Americans - You Might Be Surprised
White Evangelicals - Influence Beyond Their Numbers
Appalachia - Surprisingly Democratic
Why Republicans Should Be Really, Really, Scared

Monday: Last of the Series - Extra Bits and Pieces

Cross posted at DailyKos.


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
When those young people have gone jobless for 4 years... (4.00 / 1)
...we will see how enthusiastic for corporate Democrats they remain.  The jobs catastrophe continues unabated and Obama is working on slashing the deficit, he is a joke.

And everything the young demand, in the same tone and eloquence that bought them on board. (4.00 / 1)
The "rest of the democrats" ie non corporate, non blue dog, non leiberman democrats, have to understand, they will sour on politics, not on corporate dems.

There is some discussion, and I have contributed, that letting the corpodems, conservadems and the "you're-contributing-how-much?"dems are only hurting themselves by scuttling progressive policy, as they are going to be the first ousted in Deed's-like defeats when Democratic voters stay home.

But make no mistake, the dems will stay home, and if we are talking about young people, they may stay home for a lifetime. You might get an election cycle that strips the Democratic Caucus of BlueDogs, but that will be followed by a Democratic Party Minority Leader.


Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


[ Parent ]
I see your point, but (0.00 / 0)
I get really tired of the old canard, "If we don't give the young people EVERYTHING they want, they'll sour on politics forever."

People kept saying that when it seemed possible that Hillary Clinton could become the Democrats' nominee.  We just HAD to nominate Obama or else the young voters would be disillusioned FOREVER.

To them, I say suck it up.  If you can't deal with the peaks and valleys of politics, you might as well just give up now.  When I was 23 years old, I suffered possibly the worst heartbreak any young voter could face -- watching the candidate I chose, the candidate with the most votes, step aside because of a Supreme Court ruling and the shady machinations of the other candidate's brother (governor of Florida).  I could have thrown in the towel then, but I didn't.  And trust me, it was absolute torture at times -- you were there for the past eight years, so you know.  If these kids can't handle some basic disappointment over not getting everything they want, then they are fair weather voters who can never, ever be counted upon to deliver when we need them.  


[ Parent ]
Excellent Overview (4.00 / 2)
Now, of course, the question is, what are Dems going to do with this winning hand?

The answer, my friend, may not be blowing in the wind.  From looks of things right now, it could come from another Dylan song, "I Threw It All Away," unless they return to the economic populism of the past.

If this newest cohort of voters has to live through another three years of sky-high under- and un-employment, it's pretty darned hard to see them locking into the Democratic Party for life.

Just how stupid are the leaders of the Democratic Party?

Don't ask. Don't tell.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


Yup. (4.00 / 1)
It doesn't matter if you hold a winning hand if you can't tell a diamond from a club.

I would guess if Democrats are not viewed as doing anything about unemployment, today's 18-29 crowd will simply stop voting for a few cycles.  Why bother?  But eventually when they came back to the polls they would still be more Democratic.  Idle speculation; I certainly hope I never find out if I'm right or wrong.


[ Parent ]
Very good job (0.00 / 0)
and I'm particularly glad you addressed the question of the stability of a cohort's politics as they age -- most of the analyses of cohorts I've seen (for instance, opinion on same-sex marriage) just seem to assume that a cohort's opinion will stay stable.

We start with 1972: Nixon won all age brackets, but McGovern pulled in 46% of those aged 18-29, compared with 31-33% for all other age groups.  In 2008, this same cohort, now 54-65, voted approximately 50% for Obama.  Obviously, those young idealist hippies abandoned their utopian nonsense as they aged, paid taxes, and raised families.  Oh wait...  they didn't, did they?

The glass-half-empty version of this, though, is to look at it from the Democratic Party's perspective.  They can attract young voters with an explicitly anti-war candidate who's serious about the New Deal and about helping workers...and, over the course of a couple of decades, they can pull the Party pretty far to the right, run a basically centrist candidate who's not particularly interested in the New Deal...and not pay a price electorally with that cohort of voters.


Maturity (4.00 / 4)
     I don't know what Churchill was talking about, but I was part of a group of very conservative people when I was a teenager, and a large majority of those I'm still in touch with from that group are far more liberal now. As teenagers we valued "freedom", "free markets" and other abstractions rather than things government could do to improve the quality of life. But as we got older we saw what actual Republican and "conservative" government meant, from Watergate to the Moral Majority, Iran-Contra, and the anti-democratic role the right supported in Latin America, South Africa, and the Philippines down to the corrupt ideology-driven Bush-Cheney Administration. Experience and actual events have far more of an impact on people's political perspective than a mechanistic idea about age.

Some Folks DON'T Mature, However (0.00 / 0)
Quite the opposite, some hit a traumatic experience, and going into to a prolonged regression.  Others simply freeze.  

It's nice to think that what you describe is "normal development", and in one sense it surely is. But there's no guaranteeing that folks will grow up in normal times or a normal political culture.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
It's worth noting Churchill never actually said it anyway (0.00 / 0)
It's an invented quote - he was a young Tory and his wife was a lifelong liberal, who he'd never have been so rude to.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
"Open Left's incredibly not heavy-handed fundraiser continues" (0.00 / 0)
Hmm, "incredibly not heavy-handed" sounds like an ironical side blow at a critical comment. I haven't been paying much attention here recently, so, pls help me, what's the punchline?
:D

Give! n/t (0.00 / 0)


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search