By trade I am a number cruncher and analyst, but I am also a young voter advocate. So naturally, I was very excited to get my hands on some preliminary data and figure out how many young voters came out for this election. Being a twenty-something myself, my expectations were very high.
Ever since high school, I have heard many sneer about our generation’s “untapped potential.” The joke was that we were all too lazy to participate. Au contraire…
While I was watching the news on November 4th, I was delighted to see the large numbers of young people at the election rallies (for either side). So I guess the joke is on the naysayers. But the question is, by how much?
Power in Numbers
To determine whether the “lazy” people came out to vote (or not), I needed to analyze the exit poll data for the age group of 18 to 29 year olds. While the official Census statistics for the 2008 election are far from available (expect them in a year or so), preliminary estimates were available via CNN news and the CIRCLE.
As I was analyzing the numbers, I wanted to determine how many of the 18 to 29 year olds voted, this year vs. the 2004 election. I also wanted to make sure that the margins and any increase in participation was mathematically significant, otherwise they would not be worth reporting. So here are the numbers (as of Friday, Nov 7):
Looks kind of boring, doesn’t it? Well, allow me to show you the significance:
Score One for the “Young’uns”
According to the preliminary numbers, there was a 1% increase in voter turnout for the age group 18-29, representing some 1.5 million additional voters. Nice, right? Well it gets better: The election data also shows us that the Democrats won over the 18-29 age groups by a very large number – an amazing 34% margin - as compared to the 9% margin of the 2004 election.
Obama on the Brain…
Was the margin because of Obama? Well, yeah… we voted for him and he obviously won. But does that prove the increase in voter participation was because of Obama?
After all, he’s quite charismatic. Not to mention that he has been attached at the hip to college students and twenty-something’s across the nation. He has pointed out our potential, acknowledging our numbers. And beyond that, young voters have long said that they identify with him and view his policies as the changes they would like to see in the government. Flip side is that there are a lot of young voters who did not like him, identifying more with another candidate – those of which are not to be discounted! Arguably, the election could have gone either way.
Numbers Tell a Story
One issue that came into mind is that perhaps the increase in voter participation among 18 to 29 voters was just a coincidence. It could have been due to a general increase in population, and thereby an increase in the potential number of voters in the age group. To find out, I took the liberty of analyzing the population estimates for 2004 and 2008, taken from the US Census. As I guessed, the data indicated that there was an increase in population during the time period. But did it correlate with the increase in voter participation?
As it would appear, those aged 18 to 29 experienced an approximate 1% increase in the general population (approx. 0.8% if you want to be technical) from 2004 to 2008.
To clarify, this means that those who were 14 to17 years old during the 2004 election came of age and are able to vote, now at the age of 18 to 21. Likewise, those who were 26 to 29 years old in 2004 have now shifted to the ages of 30 to 33 (or to the 30 to 44 voter age group).
In order for the 18 to 29 age group to increase by 1% from the last election, more 14 to 17 year olds would have to shift into voting age than the portion of 26 to 29 year olds going into the next age demographic.
So as it would appear, the 1% increase in voter turnout was directly related to the 1% increase in population of the 18 to 29 age group, right? Well, that’s only half right. The increase in population did increase the voter base for 18 to 29 year olds, but comparing percentages does not always give an accurate outlook.
A closer look at the numbers reveal that the 1% increase in population for this age demographic represented some additional 4.4 million people for the 18 to 29 voter base – how many of these that actually registered to vote is unknown. However, this is compared to the estimated 1.5 million additional voters that participated in 2008 election, vs. those in 2004. Thus, we can rule out that voter participation in the 18 to 29 age group increased simply because of an increase in the population base. While both increased, they were not equal and the increase in voter participation was because of something else.
I agree that it would have been nice to see all 4.4 million newbie voters participate in this election, but 1.5 million is a nice figure. And coincidentally, it’s a 34% increase… but as cool as that may seem, it does not prove that it is the same 34% margin that Democrats won by within our age group.
The Last Laugh
Despite that, the 18 to 29 age group accounted for 18% of all voters, even though we are only 16% of the total voting population. Good job there!
But questions remain: How powerful was our age group? How significant was our vote? Warning: Naysayers, check your pacemakers…
On a national level, the Democrats won by an approximate 7% margin (53% for Democrats, less 46% for Republicans = 7% margin).
If 18% of all voters were 18 to 29 and they voted with a 34% margin favoring the Democrats, then they represent approximately 6.1% of the Democratic 7% margin, or 87% of their victory.
Who would have thought?
~K
If you are new to Twenties Money Magazine Please consider Subscribing to our RSS Feed.
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
That’s great news and I expected to see numbers like that. I believe the internet and the rise and impact of social media was the main factor in seeing numbers increase. Also, because of the severity and importance of this historic election.
Craig
http://www.budgetpulse.com
[...] The Young Have Spoken at Twenties Money [...]