harvard iop

It's been really touching to see all the concern-trolling in conservative corners about Obama's youth vote slipping away. Unfortunately, it's just not true. A few weeks ago Democracy Corps reported that their latest survey found Obama with a stable 60 - 33% lead over Senator Obama McCain among young voters.

Just yesterday, the Harvard Institute of Politics confirmed that substantial lead. In their latest fall survey, the Harvard Institute of Politics found that Senator Obama continues to lead John McCain among young voters by a margin of 55 - 32%, a number not substantially changed since their last poll in the spring.

To put this into context, Harvard IOP polling from the 2004 election cycle showed Senator John Kerry with a 13-percentage point (52%-39%) lead among college students in the month leading up to the election. According to exit poll results, Senator Kerry won the total youth vote (18-29 year olds) in 2004, by a 9-point margin, 54%-45%.

Other findings:

Enthusiasm Gap:

In addition to the current gap in the horse race, a significant “enthusiasm” gap exists between Obama and McCain supporters on this issue. Slightly more than four-in-five (83%) young voters planning to vote for Obama tell us that they are excited about the election this fall, which is 27 percentage points higher than McCain’s supporters (56%). It should be noted that 44% of Obama supporters say they are “very excited,” while only 11% of McCain supporters say the same.

In addition, 68% of all young female voters say they are excited (56% of male voters), 74% of African Americans, 64% of young Hispanic/Latino voters and 60% of young Born-Again-
Christians are excited about the election this fall.

In politics, excitement often translates into engagement and this is most certainly the case for both Obama and McCain supporters this year. A slight majority of Senator Obama’s supporters (51%) indicate that they were interested in volunteering (12% very interested) on the campaign and 39
percent of McCain’s supporters said the same (13% very interested). These numbers translate to hundreds of thousands of potential volunteers for both campaigns – ready and willing to engage if asked.

On the Issues:

As I've said in the past, don't trust the polls put out by Zogby or traditional media outlets. Frequently their sample size of young voters is too small to be meaningful, and often they do not poll online or by cellphone, missing a lot of young voters (particularly young latinos) who tend to skew towards Obama. They also tend to blur the lines at times, reporting on 18 - 35 or 18 - 40 as "youth," instead of the traditional 18 - 29 age range. The end result is oftentimes polls are comparing apples and oranges.

If you do report on those polls, be sure to mark those caveats and discrepancies. Make sure you know what their sample size and margin of error is within the young voter demographic. Here's the methodology of the Harvard Survey:

As part of Harvard’s Institute of Politics ongoing analysis of 18 to 24 year old voters dating back to 2000, the IOP has conducted a survey of N=1,031 18 to 24 year olds on issues related to the 2008 campaign for President. This project is an interim update to our Biannual Youth Survey on Politics and Public Service, which saw its 14th release issued on April 24, 2008. The interviewing period for this study was between July 28 and August 12, 2008; all interviews were conducted online by our research partner, Harris Interactive.

Yesterday I was on a conference call with the Harvard Institute of Politics's John Della Volpe, who presented findings from the IOP's surveys and recent election research. There wasn't too much new information for those who are regular readers of Future Majority - the youth vote began trending up in 2004 thanks to new outreach programs; this resulted in Democratic victories in 2006; Millennials are optimistic and civically engaged; we are multilateralists who believe in international institutions, etc. There was, however, some data about morality, religion, and political persuasion that I find very interesting.

First, the poll found that an increasing number of American youth are spiritual (70%), however that does not translate into a desire to see candidate's profess their faith on the campaign trail.

Also interesting on this particular slide is the question about the moral direction of the U.S. This is an often abused statistic - particularly by the religious right, who use it as a club to beat pundits and journalists with the idea that more Americans are supportive of their position on abortion and stem cells. Della Volpe shed some light on these figures, pointing out that moral direction is a subjective term, and that in the cross tabs, it becomes apparent that self-identified Democrats responding to this question cite poverty, global warming, and Iraq as evidence or moral failings, while traditionally conservative respondents identify culture war issues like abortion and stem cells. So while similar numbers of Democrats and Republicans agree that the country is headed in the wrong moral direction, their views on what that means couldn't be further apart.

By far, this slide below was the most interesting piece of the presentation (click for a larger image). Take a look at the green and gray constituencies and tell me your head doesn't start to explode. Basically it identifies two new "types" of voter who comprise more than half of the Millennial electorate: the Secular Center who are less likely to vote, less supportive of moral arguments in politics less likely to support universal health care, but more supportive of gay rights; and the Religious Center who are more likely to vote, somehow split between Kerry and Bush despite the fact that African Americans and Hispanics (Democratic constituencies) are driving the growth of this sector, don't support GLBT rights, yet are greener than their secular counterparts.

I have no idea yet how to square these percentages with the actual numerical size of Millennials, and the recent swing towards Democrats by Millennials, or even with the question about partisan identification and morality mentioned above. Cognitive dissonance is setting in, and I'm getting eaten alive this week by my day job. I'll be back with more in this over the weekend once I get a chance to think and run some questions by the folks at the IOP. In the meantime, what's your take on it?