How Younger Voters in Alabama Could Change the State

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Really, really interesting read on demographics and priority shifts based on generations.  Heart of the article focuses on Alabama potentially turning purple long term and an aging Republican electorate.

http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2017/12/the_color_purple_how_millennia.html

[autigeremt 6,660]

Possibly. I'm hoping they become more libertarian to moderate, independent thinkers. Time will tell.

[TexasTiger 12,974]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

Possibly. I'm hoping they become more libertarian to moderate, independent thinkers. Time will tell.

They have to at least be better thinkers.

[AU64 10,122]

I doubt the premise of this article. 

Younger voters made an impact because of how many people stayed home.  JMO but for Jones to win by less than 1% over an alleged pedophile does not signal a change direction for the state.    With a reasonable candidate, Jones would have lost by 10 points....which is about where he was before Moore's bad news broke.   

But I guess the Dems can dream.   IMO at least, Jones will be there for the short term only and the GOP will come to it's senses and select a responsible person for their candidate. 

[TexasTiger 12,974]

25 minutes ago, AU64 said:

I doubt the premise of this article. 

Younger voters made an impact because of how many people stayed home.  JMO but for Jones to win by less than 1% over an alleged pedophile does not signal a change direction for the state.    With a reasonable candidate, Jones would have lost by 10 points....which is about where he was before Moore's bad news broke.   

But I guess the Dems can dream.   IMO at least, Jones will be there for the short term only and the GOP will come to it's senses and select a responsible person for their candidate. 

I don't the think any big change is imminent. But there's reason to think younger voters have very different priorities.

[McLoofus 35,182]

26 minutes ago, AU64 said:

I doubt the premise of this article. 

Younger voters made an impact because of how many people stayed home.  JMO but for Jones to win by less than 1% over an alleged pedophile does not signal a change direction for the state.    With a reasonable candidate, Jones would have lost by 10 points....which is about where he was before Moore's bad news broke.   

But I guess the Dems can dream.   IMO at least, Jones will be there for the short term only and the GOP will come to it's senses and select a responsible person for their candidate. 

Moore wasn't really a reasonable candidate even before it became clear that he was a sexual deviant, but that only further serves your argument.

I agree that this election doesn't signal any sort of seismic shift, but it is interesting to think that emerging and future generations of voters might be more critical and pragmatic in voting for the candidate who actually best represents their self interests. The Democrats might've learned that lesson an even harder way last year than the GOP did this month. 

[DKW 86 7,437]

I hope that overall, and in the long run, that we as a state can start looking for qualified candidates instead of Wallace-Moore Crazies. This was a big thing for Alabama. We turned the corner for the country. We said no to crazy. There are a lot of liberal journalists that are just shocked that it even happened. By next Summer, they may be referring to it as "The Alabama Miracle/Awakening/Return to Normalcy." This isnt over by a long shot. Moore is going to run for Governor and he will likely cake walk thru the GOP Primary. Is Alabama going to hand the Governor's Mansion over to a Dem? I dont know, but I bet a serious GOP write-in candidate might win. Make no mistake tho, we have not seen the last of Roy Moore.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

4 hours ago, AU64 said:

I doubt the premise of this article. 

Younger voters made an impact because of how many people stayed home.  JMO but for Jones to win by less than 1% over an alleged pedophile does not signal a change direction for the state.    With a reasonable candidate, Jones would have lost by 10 points....which is about where he was before Moore's bad news broke.   

But I guess the Dems can dream.   IMO at least, Jones will be there for the short term only and the GOP will come to it's senses and select a responsible person for their candidate. 

I don't necessarily doubt the premise because of voter age.  The largest active voting block in the country are baby boomers.  Moore won that crowd handily.  After that, it's millenials.  As boomers die off, I think a shift could happen.  Not saying it will, but the priorities and world view of Gen X and Millenials are very different from Boomers.

Go back to the presidential election.  If only Millenials voted, Trump would have lost 45 of 50 states, including Alabama.  That's a giant chunk of voters who are just beginning to enter their active voting stage of life, and the Republican party is behind the eight ball with them already.  Check out these voter breakdowns from the 2016 election.

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/11/09/how-we-voted-by-age-education-race-and-sexual-orientation/

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Careful what you wish for. 

 

[AU64 10,122]

6 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

I don't necessarily doubt the premise because of voter age.  The largest active voting block in the country are baby boomers.  Moore won that crowd handily.  After that, it's millenials.  As boomers die off, I think a shift could happen.  Not saying it will, but the priorities and world view of Gen X and Millenials are very different from Boomers.

Go back to the presidential election.  If only Millenials voted, Trump would have lost 45 of 50 states, including Alabama.  That's a giant chunk of voters who are just beginning to enter their active voting stage of life, and the Republican party is behind the eight ball with them already.  Check out these voter breakdowns from the 2016 election.

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/11/09/how-we-voted-by-age-education-race-and-sexual-orientation/

That is true but folks are making assumptions that millennials will not change their voting preferences as they age and have different interests.   If people vote their interests,  the interests of millennials are likely to change too as they change from recipients of government services to providers of government services via their income taxes.......and of course as they realize what Social Security means to them personally.  

Mostly I see voting blocks dividing along two lines.....rural vs urban........and socio-economic lines. ..the age thing is just a reflection of the latter in many ways. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

23 minutes ago, AU64 said:

That is true but folks are making assumptions that millennials will not change their voting preferences as they age and have different interests.   If people vote their interests,  the interests of millennials are likely to change too as they change from recipients of government services to providers of government services via their income taxes.......and of course as they realize what Social Security means to them personally.  

Mostly I see voting blocks dividing along two lines.....rural vs urban........and socio-economic lines. ..the age thing is just a reflection of the latter in many ways. 

I think you have this inversed.  Currently, Millennials are the ones paying into income taxes.  Most Millenials are now in their 20s or early 30s.  It's actually boomers that are starting to become more recipients of government help via Social Security, Medicare, etc.  (See: my retired parents)

Voting tendencies are formed early and can be tough to break.  It's certainly not a good place long term for republicans running on current platforms and themes.  Now, if Dems run someone like Warren, I think they have just as much to worry about.  But there's sizeable evidence that younger voters want to support candidates that have a willingness to do two key things: work together and expand equal rights protections.

[AU64 10,122]

Could be Brad but lots of old Dems have changed sides.....and mostly higher wage earners are in their 40s and 50s...and above and pay the most taxes. 

[McLoofus 35,182]

I would guess that both of you are right.

There are probably a lot of rich Trump voters who thumbed rides to Woodstock. It's undeniable that priorities often shift as one amasses wealth and progeny to provide security for. 

But it's also undeniable that views on equal rights protections have changed. More people hold tolerance and acceptance as core values, while reactionaries grow fewer and more desperate. And I would guess that equal rights protection has become just as important a platform for many as anti-abortion has been for others. 

Of course, voting on those matters is a luxury for those of us who have jobs. That seems to be what decided this past election- Trump spoke to those who don't and Hillary didn't. Maybe it always will be the primary issue? Sure seems like Bernie might have won the Democratic nomination in a fair fight largely in part because he spoke to young college grads crushed by student loan debt. 

 

 

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

16 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Careful what you wish for. 

 

Need to be careful with Kimmel's stuff. I know for a fact that a band one he did at SXSW the questions were not for the answers shown on TV.