The Millennial Generation and the 2008 Election

The Millennial generation (birth years 1978 to 1996 or 2000, depending on definition) made a huge impact on this election.  I have made a detailed analysis of this impact and how it is likely to grow in the future in a new report, Generation We and the 2008 Election.  Here are some of the key findings form that report.

In 2008, 18-29 year olds, now all members of the Millennial generation , voted Democratic by a stunning 66-32 margin.  And they did so with remarkable generational consistency: 18-24 year olds voted 66-32 Democratic while 25-29 year olds voted 66-31 Democratic.  Essentially no difference.

Obama’s support among 18-29 year olds was remarkably broad, extending across racial barriers.  He carried not just Hispanic 18-29 year olds (76-19) and black (18-29 year old (95-4) but also white 18-29 year olds (54-44).  Obama’s 10 point advantage among white 18-29 year olds contrasts starkly with his 15 deficit among older whites.

Obama’s huge overall margin among Millennials contributed mightily to his strong victory this November.  Indeed, without 18-29 year olds, Obama’s popular vote margin would have been slightly under one percentage point.  That figure implies that the overwhelmingly proportion of Obama’s popular vote victory (87 percent) was attributable to the support of 18-29 year old Millennials.  Indeed, without these Millennial voters, Obama would have been hard-pressed to claim much of a mandate from his election victory.

It is important to stress that the Millennials’ political leanings are not just about party but rather reflect a deep structure of progressive attitudes that propels them, at this point, toward one particular party.  In a recent post, I cited some exit poll data showing how heavily Millennials endorse the idea of increased government activism to solve problems.  More complete recent data on Millennials’ attitudes comes from the Democracy Corps/Campaign for America’s Future (DC/CAF) post-election survey of 2000 voters, conducted November 4-5.  Full crosstabs from this survey have been made publicly available on the web, so it is possible to look at the answers of 18-29 year old Millennials for every question on the survey.

Consider these findings.  Millennials showed less tax sensitivity than voters as a whole in terms of moves to increase economic performance and fairness.  For example, respondents were given the choice “I'm more worried that we will fail to make the investments we need to create jobs and strengthen the economy. OR I'm more worried that we will go too far in increasing government spending and will end up raising taxes to pay for it”.  Millennials chose the first over the second statement by 67-33, while voters overall were split down the middle 48-49.  Similarly, the following choice was posed about corporate tax breaks: “I'm more worried that we will give more tax breaks to the rich and corporations. OR I'm more worried that we will go too far taxing the rich and corporations”.  Millennials favored the first statement over the second by 74-26, compared to 61-34 among all voters.

A related economic policy choice was the following: “When I voted, I was more concerned that Obama will raise taxes and increase government spending. OR When I voted, I was more concerned that McCain will continue the economic policies that have cost us jobs and caused higher prices”.  By 57-33, Millennials were more concerned about McCain’s policies causing job loss and price hikes than about Obama’s policies causing tax hikes and spending increases.  But among voters as a whole, this choice elicited a very close 49-45 split.

On health care, respondents were offered these two statements: “Our health care system needs fundamental reform, we should regulate insurance companies and give everyone a choice between a public plan or what they have right now. OR Our health care system needs fundamental reform; we should give American families more choice by giving individuals a tax credit to choose their own coverage”.  Millennials preferred the first over the second statement by 67-32, a substantially higher margin than among all voters (58-38).  There was also a health care statement pair about how boldly to act to solve the problem:  “On health care, we need to act boldly to address the problems. OR On health care, we need to act step-by-step to address the problems”.  Millennials were solidly on the side of moving boldly, rather than step-by-step (57-38), while voters as a whole actually sided slightly with the more incremental approach (46-50).

All this augurs well for progressive policy priorities.  As does the fact that the Millennials’ influence on the electorate will grow sharply until at least 2016. There were about 48 million eligible Millennial voters in 2008, a figure that will rise to 64 million in 2012 and 81 million in 2016.  That's an awful lot of potential support for progressive public policy.  It will be up to progressives to mobilize that support and keep it mobilized.

Comments

[superdestroyer]

With every demographic trend against the Repulbicans, the real question is whether a two party system is sustainable in the future? I when you see 80% plus support for Democrats by virtually all non-white demographic groups, it should be obvious that the Republican Party is not sustainable. However, that means that the U.S. will become a one party state where elections are decided in the Democratic primary. Also, it means that all of the former Republicans will start voting the the Democratic primary.

A last thought will be how does the federal government continue to enforce the Voting Rights Act in a one party state?