In a recent post I questioned the claim set forth in a July 1 New York Times article that the newest generation of voters, the so-called "post-millennials," were significantly more conservative and less supportive of President Obama than members of the millennial generation. The Times article cited an online survey conducted earlier this year by the Harvard Center for Politics, which found that Americans under the age of 25 were more skeptical of activist government and therefore more open to voting for Mitt Romney than the 25 to 29 year-olds who strongly supported Mr. Obama four years ago.
In my post I presented evidence from a recent Gallup Poll as well as the 2010 national exit poll that found post-millennials to actually be more liberal and more likely to vote Democratic than members of the millennial generation. I can now provide additional confirmation of these findings, based on evidence from the 2012 Gallup Tracking Poll.
Gallup does not normally separate 18 to 24 year-olds from 25 to 29 year-olds in their weekly breakdown of presidential candidate support by age groups among registered voters. In response to my request, however, Gallup generously provided me with the following results based on interviews with registered voters from early May through early July:
18-24 Obama 57, Romney 34 N=1470
25-29 Obama 53, Romney 35 N=1135
Contrary to the claims made in the New York Times article, post-millennials were significantly more supportive of President Obama than millennials. This is not surprising since the post-millennial generation is even more racially diverse than the millennial generation, a trend that is certain to continue with future generations of voters.
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
f/f
f/f
And people of all ages that despise the idea of going to a Euro style healthcare system that leaves diabetics untreated for extensive periods of time, where it takes MONTHS to get an MRI...hope young people don't get brain tumors because they will be bleeding out from their noses by the time they get checked after a decade of Obamacare!
.For anyone to sit and tell us what will happen if health care is instituted is like reading a crystal ball I have never been without INS but i know many who are and that is the saddest thing..At least for the children..We will find a way to pay for it like we always do.
"Listen, we're just politicians. I wasn't elected to play God. The American people probably aren't going to fall in love with Mitt Romney. I'll tell you this: 95 percent of the people that show up to vote in November are going to show up in that voting booth, and they are going to vote for or against Barack Obama."
That is not the way to determine the head of state. And that is an obvious indicator of why partisan politics in America has become such a corrupt, divisive, self-defeating failure of a system.
Fortunately, the Founding Fathers foresaw that we would need to alter and reform our government, and they provided the way to do it in Article 5 of the Constitution.
The 21st Century Declaration of Independence suggests how we can do that, and why -- how we can prevent the rule of money, end and prevent the divisive contest for the throne, and instead establish government of, by, and for the people. See http://messenger.cjcmp.org/newdeclaration.html and http://messenger.cjcmp.org/democracy.html - which also shows how we can do it..
Oh, and the only way unemployed college students would be collecting unemployment is if they lost their job while going to school . . .please rethink your answers and try again.
There are very few reasons to vote for Obama and none if you are focused on the economy.
Same goes for the phrase "left them with a horrific economy". As I recall the one who left us with a horrific economy was again, Dubya, when he departed in 2009.
This is known as "transference" in psychiatry--you transfer an emotion you have for one person onto another, as you fail to acknowledge it on a conscious level for one reason or another.
But winning wasn't good enough for the hard core of the base. They also wanted to draw blood from the other side. Â
Sarah did a good job at that and drove the levelheaded folks away.Â
Now they want to do the same thing again. But Mitt is wised up and isn't about to let them -- not after they managed to box him in during the primaries.Â