Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Political polling

Full FT article

Millennials are shattering the oldest rule in politics​


“If you are not a liberal at 25, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative at 35 you have no brain.” So said Winston Churchill. Or US president John Adams. Or perhaps King Oscar II of Sweden. Variations of this aphorism have circulated since the 18th century, underscoring the well-established rule that as people grow older, they tend to become more conservative. The pattern has held remarkably firm. By my calculations, members of Britain’s “silent generation”, born between 1928 and 1945, were five percentage points less conservative than the national average at age 35, but around five points more conservative by age 70. The “baby boomer” generation traced the same path, and “Gen X”, born between 1965 and 1980, are now following suit. Millennials — born between 1981 and 1996 — started out on the same trajectory, but then something changed. The shift has striking implications for the UK’s Conservatives and US Republicans, who can no longer simply rely on their base being replenished as the years pass.

It’s not every day that concepts from public health analytics find a use in politics, but if you’re a strategist on the right, then now might be a good time for a primer on untangling age, period and cohort effects. Age effects are changes that happen over someone’s life regardless of when they are born, period effects result from events that affect all ages simultaneously, and cohort effects stem from differences that emerge among people who experience a common event at the same time.

This framework is used to understand differences in a population and whether they are likely to be lasting. This makes it perfectly suited to interrogating why support for conservative parties is so low among millennials and whether it will stay there.

Let’s start with age effects, and the oldest rule in politics: people become more conservative with age. If millennials’ liberal inclinations are merely a result of this age effect, then at age 35 they too should be around five points less conservative than the national average, and can be relied upon to gradually become more conservative. In fact, they’re more like 15 points less conservative, and in both Britain and the US are by far the least conservative 35-year-olds in recorded history.

On to period effects. Could some force be pushing voters of all ages away from the right? In the UK there has certainly been an event. Support for the Tories plummeted across all ages during Liz Truss’s brief tenure, and has only partially rebounded. But a population-wide effect cannot completely explain millennials’ liberal exceptionalism, nor why we see the same pattern in the US without the same shock.

So the most likely explanation is a cohort effect — that millennials have developed different values to previous generations, shaped by experiences unique to them, and they do not feel conservatives share these. This is borne out by US survey data showing that, having reached political maturity in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, millennials are tacking much further to the left on economics than previous generations did, favouring greater redistribution from rich to poor.

Similar patterns are evident in Britain, where millennials are more economically leftwing than Gen-Xers and boomers were at the same age, and Brexit has alienated a higher share of former Tory backers among this generation than any other. Even before Truss, two-thirds of millennials who had backed the Conservatives before the EU referendum were no longer planning to vote for the party again, and one in four said they now strongly disliked the Tories.

The data is clear that millennials are not simply going to age into conservatism. To reverse a cohort effect, you have to do something for that cohort. Home ownership continues to prove more elusive for millennials than for earlier generations at the same age in both countries. With houses increasingly difficult to afford, a good place to start would be to help more millennials get on to the housing ladder. Serious proposals for reforming two of the world’s most expensive childcare systems would be another.

UK millennials and their “Gen Z” younger cousins will probably cast more votes than boomers in the next general election. After years of being considered an electoral afterthought, their vote will soon be pivotal. Without drastic changes to both policy and messaging, that could consign conservative parties to an increasingly distant second place.
 
I echo prunus and kabbes points above. There are all kinds of questions here - e.g how are the LDs assigned? - though to be fair the piece does not draw the sort of firm conclusions that are being attributed to it
The FT puts it down to home ownership
That is not really true, home ownership is mentioned as one possible factor, childcare is another, Brexit another.

I think there is also a lot of work that needs to be done to untangle social liberal positions from economic 'left' ones. E.g. younger generations are far more socially liberal on LGBT issues, and this is true across social groups, 538 did some analysis that indicted that even among Christian evangelicals there was a significant shift to more social liberal LGBT attitudes.

If you were going to try to connect this shift to home ownership then you would need to compare home ownership with 'left' views.

Despite the questions I have I'll post a link to the tweet below as it might be interesting

FlTyBZ3XEAA2K2D.jpeg
FlTyK9VWAAAJ2Nc.jpeg

(My immediate thought is the noise in the non-anglophone west data, especially for the millennials)
 
Last edited:
I echo prunus and kabbes points above. There are all kinds of questions here - e.g how are the LDs assigned? - though to be fair the piece does not draw the sort of firm conclusions that are being attributed to it

That is not really true, home ownership is mentioned as one possible factor, childcare is another, Brexit another.

I think there is also a lot of work that needs to be done to untangle social liberal positions from economic 'left' ones. E.g. younger generations are far more socially liberal on LGBT issues, and this is true across social groups, 538 did some analysis that indicted that even among Christian evangelicals there was a significant shift to more social liberal LGBT attitudes.

If you were going to try to connect this shift to home ownership then you would need to compare home ownership with 'left' views.

Despite the questions I have I'll post a link to the tweet below as it might be interesting

View attachment 357996
View attachment 357997

(My immediate thought is the noise in the non-anglophone west data, especially for the millennials)


I'm not sure how they are defining west there, but this could be explained by the fact that the neoliberal turn of the 80s was spearheaded by Thatcher and Reagan and in non-Anglophone countries neoliberalism has not been quite so severe and they have generally retained affordable or free education, social or affordable housing, affordable access to childcare etc to a greater degree than the US or the UK.

Millenials in English speaking countries have generally spent their entire adult lives experiencing losing access to things they need that their parents had access to and having their interests totally ignored politically, the reaction to Corbynism in the UK is the most striking example of this.
 

Tories are going to get obliterated I think, out of power for at least 3 election cycles for sure and maybe even permanently.

While they could reinvent themselves and stage a come back after losing a couple of elections, they are also failing to attract and retain millenial MPs, members, and policy makers, which suggests that the possibility of a successful reinvention is low.

 
I don't see Starmer and the current iteration of Labour doing anything much to address the material reasons for this change, so there's definitely an opening for a form of red Toryism. I wouldn't write them off when the opposition is so feeble and default.
 
Tories are going to get obliterated I think, out of power for at least 3 election cycles for sure and maybe even permanently.

While they could reinvent themselves and stage a come back after losing a couple of elections, they are also failing to attract and retain millenial MPs, members, and policy makers, which suggests that the possibility of a successful reinvention is low.

People were definitely also saying this stuff 25 years ago, because I remember being 21 and starry-eyed for the future off the back of it.
 
People were definitely also saying this stuff 25 years ago, because I remember being 21 and starry-eyed for the future off the back of it.

Maybe but I think this is different. Younger people were actually more likely to vote Thatcher than middle aged people iirc. There wasn't the same prolonged neglect of an entire generation based on the flawed assumption that they would become Conservative as they got older. Even if millenials do start getting property now the Tory brand is quite toxic now, and worse they are also seen as incompetent now.
 
Tories are going to get obliterated I think, out of power for at least 3 election cycles for sure and maybe even permanently.

While they could reinvent themselves and stage a come back after losing a couple of elections, they are also failing to attract and retain millenial MPs, members, and policy makers, which suggests that the possibility of a successful reinvention is low.


Tbf can see why Sunak thinks the undecided are shy tories cos I saw the headline in the shop yesterday and my first thought was how the fuck is anyone undecided?

Agree on tories gone for 3 election cycles but reckon it be them that gets it after that purely on the gaming inherent in the system
 
People were definitely also saying this stuff 25 years ago, because I remember being 21 and starry-eyed for the future off the back of it.

The Tories were in a particularly bad state in 1997 but they weren't facing this demographic issue they face now. Personally I was the exact reverse of optimistic 25 years ago, Labour as a party of progressive social reform had been destroyed, Tony Blair was enthusiastically elected not so much on an anti-Tory ticket but a competent alternative Tory ticket and there was no left wing opposition or discourse outside very marginal groups. The political prospects in this country at that time were truly grim, soft(ish) neo-liberalism for ever while the economy looked pretty stable.

But more broadly, the argument that the Tories have always recovered in the past doesn't actually have any weight to it. It's an argument by superficial induction. It neglects to look at the reasons why they recovered and it becomes this sort of abstract unchangeable law of British politics. It's a thought stopper.
 
I think Labour are in long term decline as well. That's probably the biggest hope for a Tory come back IMO.
 
Tories are going to get obliterated I think, out of power for at least 3 election cycles for sure and maybe even permanently.

While they could reinvent themselves and stage a come back after losing a couple of elections, they are also failing to attract and retain millenial MPs, members, and policy makers, which suggests that the possibility of a successful reinvention is low.


interesting...theyve also burned through a lot of their current sitting cabals in the last year even, and even Tory supporters are publicly saying that Conservativism has run out of "ideas" (lol)


there's definitely an opening for a form of red Toryism.
They also have Farage to the right of them, polling around 4-8pc IIRC which makes that less likely

This all sounds like good news but they are incredibly die hard, plus have voter suppression and boundary changes to bump them
 
The Tories were in a particularly bad state in 1997 but they weren't facing this demographic issue they face now. Personally I was the exact reverse of optimistic 25 years ago, Labour as a party of progressive social reform had been destroyed, Tony Blair was enthusiastically elected not so much on an anti-Tory ticket but a competent alternative Tory ticket and there was no left wing opposition or discourse outside very marginal groups. The political prospects in this country at that time were truly grim, soft(ish) neo-liberalism for ever while the economy looked pretty stable.

But more broadly, the argument that the Tories have always recovered in the past doesn't actually have any weight to it. It's an argument by superficial induction. It neglects to look at the reasons why they recovered and it becomes this sort of abstract unchangeable law of British politics. It's a thought stopper.
The argument that the Tories will return is by no means just based on induction. Quite the opposite. It’s deduced from the fact that we have a first past the post system that massively favours the established two parties, and it’s not that hard to reinvent yourself when out of government for ten years or more.
 
interesting...theyve also burned through a lot of their current sitting cabals in the last year even, and even Tory supporters are publicly saying that Conservativism has run out of "ideas" (lol)



They also have Farage to the right of them, polling around 4-8pc IIRC which makes that less likely

This all sounds like good news but they are incredibly die hard, plus have voter suppression and boundary changes to bump them
Forage ain't ever going to personally run for Westminster again....his MEP pension is worth more than a MP's salary...and you can't have both
 
The argument that the Tories will return is by no means just based on induction. Quite the opposite. It’s deduced from the fact that we have a first past the post system that massively favours the established two parties, and it’s not that hard to reinvent yourself when out of government for ten years or more.

Not when the interests you represent prevent you from doing so. The thing is they didn't reinvent themselves last time, they just put some effort into shedding their "nasty" image and the different wings came to a truce after a decade of infighting, but economically there wasn't much difference between Major and Cameron. The last time they actually reinvented themselves was between Heath and Thatcher and I can't think of another clear instance.
 
Not when the interests you represent prevent you from doing so. The thing is they didn't reinvent themselves last time, they just put some effort into shedding their "nasty" image and the different wings came to a truce after a decade of infighting, but economically there wasn't much difference between Major and Cameron. The last time they actually reinvented themselves was between Heath and Thatcher and I can't think of another clear instance.
They've always tried to project themselves as economically competent...so Liz Truss was a bold step in an interesting direction
 
I'm not sure how they are defining west there, but this could be explained by the fact that the neoliberal turn of the 80s was spearheaded by Thatcher and Reagan and in non-Anglophone countries neoliberalism has not been quite so severe and they have generally retained affordable or free education, social or affordable housing, affordable access to childcare etc to a greater degree than the US or the UK.

Millenials in English speaking countries have generally spent their entire adult lives experiencing losing access to things they need that their parents had access to and having their interests totally ignored politically, the reaction to Corbynism in the UK is the most striking example of this.
I don't discount that hypothesis but TBH I'm skeptical that trying to put countries into those two buckets, with a simple left-right division and over multiple different voting systems makes much sense - hence the large variance.
French polling has Le Pen's vote highest with millenials - so you have a move to 'the right', but also a move against liberalism - social and economic
 
Yeah, quite. I wouldn’t discount the millennials having a reactionary response to the consolidation of capital, rather than a socially-inclusive response.
 
I don't discount that hypothesis but TBH I'm skeptical that trying to put countries into those two buckets, with a simple left-right division and over multiple different voting systems makes much sense - hence the large variance.
French polling has Le Pen's vote highest with millenials - so you have a move to 'the right', but also a move against liberalism - social and economic
Yeah I agree with you - I don't think it makes much sense to group "non-Anglophone west" as a single category. And I'm not sure if the same patterns seen in the UK and US would be replicated in Canada, Australia and New Zealand either, but UK and US have the lion's share of Anglophone population so would have a significant effect on it.
 
I think it probably has a lot to do with home ownership and birthrates. That is to say, the increased difficulty of buying a home for Millennials (and increase in people choosing not to have children, with "not being able to afford it" being one of, if not the main reason) makes them less likely to vote for parties whose policies keep the housing ladder even further out of reach.

Also agree that grouping the non-Anglophone West together as a group is unhelpful.

I can only speak for Italy but the statistics showed a lot of young people voted for Far Right parties in the last election (at least according to polling), and it is not the case that only the older generations swung Right. It's society-wide, but these Right parties have not been in power for a long time and have a history of trying to appeal to a sense of economic justice (for ethnic Italians), i.e. the classic divide and rule whereby the immigrants are blamed for all social ills, and by lowering immigration rates we'll make life better for real Italians. This narrative has been quite successful given that there's been a series of technocrat, EU-appointed governments over the last 10 years who were not seen as improving living conditions for Italians (standards of living have fallen for a large section of society over that time as prices have increased and wages remained stagnant).

Obviously the ability of the Far Right parties to actually cure any of the social ills through racist policies will soon be shown up as farcical, but there is no political party even remotely on the "Left" (their PD quite similar to Starmer Labour) that actually has the ear of the working class.

The emptying of the political Left of all real content (i.e. proposed political programs that would reduce inequality) has been crushed by neoliberalism in Italy too -- nobody dares propose, for example, raising taxes on the wealthiest. It is inconceivable. Overton Window has shifted quite far to the right... but that is not necessarily the case in Germany, France or Spain.
 
Replete with the usual caveats about one 'straw in the wind', the latest R&W leader polling shows that Sunak's 'lustre' appears to be waning to the extent that he's polling below the completely useless Shammer...

 
25% just cried when given the question, presumably.

or laughed

figures might have been different if there had been a credible candidate offered

FGEjudoXoAAUIZz.jpg
 
Replete with the usual caveats about one 'straw in the wind', the latest R&W leader polling shows that Sunak's 'lustre' appears to be waning to the extent that he's polling below the completely useless Shammer...


Starter 8% down v Labours polling, Sunak 9% up v tories'. Still Sunak is dropping and its gotta get worse for him considering he is weak and a bit useless.
 
Back
Top Bottom