Gen-Y: Who are you voting for?

Gen-Y: Who are you voting for?

Summary: A new study suggests that 15 percent more of the Gen-Y will vote in the upcoming election, and 58 percent will follow the campaigns on social networks.

SHARE:

Conducted by Millennial Branding and Internships.com, a new study called "The Gen Y Vote" analyzes how people aged 18 to 29 view the upcoming 2012 presidential election.

vote generation y obama romney social media

Consisting of an online survey with 2,236 responses taking place in September, the firms found that more Generation Y voters are planning to come out of the woodwork in comparison to 2008. 75 percent of respondents are planning to vote this year, whereas only 60 percent decided to cast their vote in the last election.

Out of those who wish to vote, 64 percent are inclined to place themselves behind Obama, whereas only 22 percent want to vote for Romney.

In terms of the economy, the report found:

  • 61 percent feel that Obama will have a positive impact on the economy, whereas only 24 percent feel the same way about Romney;
  • 63 percent stated that the job situation has affected their vote; half of voters saying George W. Bush is to blame;
  • 21 percent said neither Obama or Bush are at fault over job security, and 20 percent say they are both responsible.
  • Will Romney's business background help the situation? According to 71 percent of Gen-Y voters, the answer is no.

44 percent associated themselves with the Democratic party, 27 percent were Independents and 17 percent declared themselves as Republican. In addition, 54 percent said they were "considering" or "very interested" in volunteering with a local campaign.

Parents, however, appear to be a strong influence in how a Gen-Y voter thinks. Aside from their own opinion, 48 percent of those polled said that parents most influence who they intend to vote for. Following this, friends and co-workers had the potential to sway their opinion -- although celebrities have no voice when it comes to this generation's voting patterns.

Unsurprisingly, 55 percent said the economy is the most important electoral issue. 14 and 13 percent respectively said education and healthcare were most important, whereas less than 5 percent cited foreign policy, immigration, same-sex marriage or the environment.

Over half of the survey respondents (58 percent) will be following the election on social networks including Twitter and Facebook. For 76 percent of the Gen-Y, television is still the main source for coverage, 55 percent will turn to newspapers and magazines, and only 23 percent will tune-in to radio. However, online news sources including blogs or news networks were not included.

In addition, less than half (36 percent) are willing to share their political opinions online.

Dan Schawbel, founder of Millennial Branding, said:

"Gen Y has become a powerful force in politics with an army of 80 million strong and will have a major impact on who wins the 2012 presidential elections. Although they feel that Obama didn't keep all the promises he made in 2008, they are willing to give him another four years to prove himself."

According to Robin D. Richards, CEO of Internships.com, Gen-Y attitudes are in constant motion. Interest in elections have surpassed 2008 by a strong margin, and potentially this is due to the expansion of social networking -- keeping members of this generation better informed, and providing a platform for communication and debate that was not matched by the previous election year.

Image credit: Todd Benson

Topics: Government US, Social Enterprise

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

14 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I'd like to know...

    I'd like to have more questions on how they decided on their votes... where they get their info, not just who sways them... get an idea of what type of propaganda is working best...

    of course its also a web survey, meaning the respondents can totally lie... not be in the describe age range, or get around the safe guards and vote 50 times... I don't see much info on how this 'research' was handled to think otherwise.
    doh123
  • Makes no difference

    I live in a state with only 2 electorial votes. My vote doesn't matter.
    CriticalSection
  • RE: Online sources not included

    On a Gen Y or any Generation survey for that matter.
    edkollin
  • Young, dumb, idealistic, inexperienced, and easily pliable; which is why

    the democrats target that demographic.

    That age group is easily the most ignorant on the issues, and on the candidates and political parties, and most of them don't follow the issues as closely as those who have matured and understand the issues and problems.

    So, it's quite understandable why those people would vote for Obama and the democrats. Then, when reality mugs them as they grow older and more experienced and wiser, they'll be questioning how they could have been so dumb when they were younger.

    I too was liberal in my younger years, then, I grew up and became wiser and more knowledgeable and more experienced.

    However, many people will remain ignorant and clueless, no matter what the age.
    adornoe
    • And then, that "Gen-Y" generation is the one that is most negatively

      affected by the policies of Obama and the democrats. Those are the people with the highest unemployment rate, with about 50% of college graduates unable to find employment when they graduate, and often having to take jobs which many find deficient and beneath them.

      So, surveys don't tell the whole story, and the story is what can be found in the real world, outside of surveys which may have political agendas built in.
      adornoe
    • Nice sweeping generalizations

      Kind of par for the course with you, the king of over simplifications of issues to the point of absurdity, illogical rants based on flawed data, and zero data to back up any of your flawed assertions.

      Case in point, your above rant.
      .DeusExMachina.
      • I must've hit a nerve, and you, no doubt, related quite well with my

        "generalizations".

        So, what's the matter, did I identify you quite correctly?

        Are you one of the "dumb, young, idealistic, inexperienced", ignoramuses, who only know how to do the lemming jump off the cliff for the democrats?

        From my prior experience debating with you, I'm pretty sure that, you are as dumb as you do sound. With people like you, I do have to oversimplify things, otherwise, you still won't get it. And in fact, you still don't get it.

        But, I notice how you didn't rebut any of my points, other than to try to classify my statements as "absurd and illogical", but, you can't really dispute anything I said.

        Now, go back to that "logic class" you claimed you took, and re-learn the lessons in it, because, so far, you are the one with no logic whatsoever in your "rebuttal".
        adornoe
        • Points? Where did you make any "points"?!?

          1) I am probably older than you.
          2) Still not data to back up your assertions
          3) As I have now pointed out to you at least FOUR times, I TAUGHT the class.
          And you would have failed.
          4) You didn't make any "points" you just posted ad hominem. You know, insults that logically invalidate your argument.
          .DeusExMachina.
          • Points? You still didn't invalidate any of the points I made,

            and, logically, you aren't even able to recognize any of them, or to acknowledge any of them.

            1) I am probably older than you.

            Irrelevant, and doubtful. And, not even a logical point to be bringing up.


            2) Still not data to back up your assertions

            Denial is no way to approach a discussion. The assertions and the date backing them up, are all around us. You just need to open up your closed-minded way of thinking.

            3) As I have now pointed out to you at least FOUR times, I TAUGHT the class.
            And you would have failed.

            To teach a class, you must first understand the material. To understand the material, you first have to go to the classes where the material is taught. And, you have to learn the material. You NEVER learned the material, and you are hopelessly without logic to back up any of your arguments or any of your "rebuttal" points, which are not really points nor rebuttals.

            4) You didn't make any "points" you just posted ad hominem. You know, insults that logically invalidate your argument.

            The points I made, are no doubt, beyond your ability to comprehend, and, even if you did, you can't go around denying the facts which are all around us, which back up all of my assertions.

            You can't invalidate any of my arguments by simply denying that they are false. You have to demonstrate where any of them are invalid or false. That's simple common sense, which, are lacking there too.
            adornoe
          • Edit function missing, so, correction to last paragraph, first sentence:

            You can't invalidate any of my arguments by simply claiming that they are false.
            adornoe
          • Edit: last sentence correction...

            That's simple common sense, which, you are lacking there too.
            adornoe
          • QED

            Wow, you don't even pay attention to your OWN nonsense! To wit:
            You:
            "Are you one of the "dumb, young, idealistic, inexperienced", ignoramuses, who only know how to do the lemming jump off the cliff for the democrats?"
            Me:
            "1) I am probably older than you."
            You:
            "Irrelevant, and doubtful. And, not even a logical point to be bringing up."

            Irrelevant?!? I am responding DIRECTLY to an accusation you are making? How is that irrelevant?

            Me:
            2) Still not data to back up your assertions

            You:
            Denial is no way to approach a discussion. The assertions and the date backing them up, are all around us. You just need to open up your closed-minded way of thinking.

            I.e., you have nothing.

            You:
            "Now, go back to that "logic class" you claimed you took, and re-learn the lessons in it…."
            Me:
            "3) As I have now pointed out to you at least FOUR times, I TAUGHT the class.
            And you would have failed.

            You:
            "To teach a class, you must first understand the material. To understand the material, you first have to go to the classes where the material is taught. And, you have to learn the material. You NEVER learned the material, and you are hopelessly without logic to back up any of your arguments or any of your "rebuttal" points, which are not really points nor rebuttals."

            Again, none of that has any bearing on whether or not I taught Logic. Which I did. Nor does it bear on the fact that you can NOT provide a predicate calculus translation of your point that provides a logical truth value, because your statements are illogical. That is the DEFINITION of logic. I doubt you even know what predicate calculus IS.
            Case in point, the rest of your diatribe. First, ad hominem is a logical fallacy. Logical fallacies invalidate arguments, regardless of the meanings of other terms, so even if I did not understand them your argument is invalid. Per se.
            Please look up logical fallacies so you even have an inkling of what you are talking about before you respond.
            Second, the muddle-headed nature of your thought process is clearly eviddent here, You write:
            "You can't invalidate any of my arguments by simply denying that they are false. You have to demonstrate where any of them are invalid or false. That's simple common sense, which, are lacking there too."

            Um, if I denied they were false, I would be claiming they were true (or indeterminate). Why on earth would I be claiming arguments were true in the process of trying to refute them?!? You can't even keep track of what you YOURSELF are saying!

            And again, ad hominem is a logical fallacy. They invalidate an argument PER SE. (This is COMPLETELY independent of the actual truth value of ANY of the premises, OR of the conclusion.) I thus demonstrated where they were invalid.

            QED.
            .DeusExMachina.
    • Gen X right screws economy then blames the Left and Gen Y. Seems legit

      Can't tell if your trolling or being serious, but wasn't it the hyper captilist right wing policies that allowed the recession to happen? It definitely wasn't Gen Y or Obama that started expensive oversea wars, deregulated the economy to stupid levels, removed the accountability of bankers or rewarded them with gigantic bonuses for destroying the economy.

      What would the Right Wing do to get young people hired again? I don't think you've gotten as wiser as you'd like to believe in your old age.
      Paul Te
  • More info

    I would like to see a nationwide survey that actually represents the entire nation. I am Gen Y. I don't think Obama deserves another four yours. I think, 2nd terms like respect should be earned. He has not earned another four years because he failed to do what he promised in the first four. Like a coach on a sports team who fails to produce a winning team they are left go to find someone who will have better results.
    MTY3