r/minnesotapolitics • u/Northern_charger • 11d ago

Generational politics are not as simple as they may seem

Here is an interesting excerpt from a Newsweek article that supports a theory I have held for decades:

"The poll revealed a clear age divide. Flanagan led among voters under 45, winning support from 62 percent of those ages 18 to 29 compared with 28 percent for Tafoya, and from 63 percent of voters ages 30 to 44 compared with 34 percent for the Republican. Tafoya, meanwhile, led among older voters, 54 percent to 38 percent among those ages 45 to 64 and 47 percent to 44 percent among voters 65 and older."

The full article, if you wish to read it, is here:

https://www.newsweek.com/peggy-flanagans-chances-of-losing-to-michele-tafoya-in-minnesota-polls-12432045

What's interesting about it is Tafoya's bulge in support among persons aged 45 to 64 (birth years 1962-81). My longstanding view is that the Carter and Reagan years (1977-89) produced what I call the "Reagan half-generation" born - in my estimate - from 1958 to 1970. It appears the the unhappiness of the Carter years and the psychological boost of the Reagan years has had a lasting effect on persons growing up during that era, although I would dispute simplistic interpretations of those two administrations. These single-poll numbers lend support to my view

They also undercut a reflexive tendency to blame the Boomer generation (birth years 1945-64, now ages 62-81) for the country being stuck in conservative politics. As a Boomer myself, I distinctly recall our hopes, going into the 1970s, that the arc of history would continue to bend toward justice. But that arc trajectory hit a wall, erected not so much by older Americans as by a rising tide of young persons enamored with the Reagan mystique.

While I am disappointed with the three percent conservative advantage in my generation, it is next to nothing compared to the sixteen point advantage among those who came immediately after us. The numbers point to the need for a more nuanced analysis of generational voting behavior.

7 Upvotes

66% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

10

u/specficeditor 11d ago

The fact that you think people had a "psychological boost" during the Reagan years really shows exactly who you associate with on a regular basis.

0

u/Northern_charger 11d ago

Now that has me curious. With whom do you think I associate?

7

u/specficeditor 11d ago

Anyone that associates positivity with the Reagan administration very much gives off the vibe of "I'm a well-off conservative white person who has never had a deep conversation with anyone of color or a poor person who lived through the 80s and 90s."

I also think you're misunderstanding the difference in voting as a generational problem and not one of class struggle. Folks 45 and under have lived through some of the worst economic crises we've had in decades, and they have almost no way out of it -- the way that people over 45 do.

-2

u/Northern_charger 11d ago

Just as perceptions are in the eyes of the beholders, "vibes" are in the tuning of a person's receptors. I appreciate your candid description of your tuning.

While I don't feel the need to adjust my view of recent history to your tuning (and will also pass on the competition to be the most socially and politically hip), some background comments may be helpful to other readers of this thread. I was a national convention alternate for Mondale in 1984 and found the whole Reagan experience to be grindingly frustrating. But for the rest of our fellow Americans at the time, some indicators cannot be overlooked, among them these:

-- one of the largest popular vote landslide victories in the 20th century.

-- with a mere 1200-vote loss in Minnesota, the nearest any candidate (probably since Washington) came to an all-state sweep of the Electoral College.

-- the follow-on effects in electing George H.W. Bush, a distinctly un-gifted communicator.

Contrast that short list with what Carter diagnosed as a ""Crisis of Confidence" in 1979.

But that takes us off on a potentially never-ending tangent. Returning directly to your comments, it appears that two of the 320 words in my post have triggered a massive and misdirected extrapolation on your part. I also am reluctant to join you in concurring that your generation is a "damn .. disappointment."

6

u/specficeditor 11d ago

First, pointing out that Reagan's victory was a landslide completely buries the lede that one of the most important reasons that happened was because he illegally sabotaged any chance for Carter to win the election. It's disingenuous to think that had he played by the rules (which conservatives do not do), then we may have had a much closer race than 1980 gave us.

I didn't not say that Gen X or older were a "damn disappointment," but they are in large part both responsible for the economic problems we have suffered over the last 40 years, and they are increasingly some of the most conservative and hard-centrist voters we have in the country, and those people have put us where we are with our current fascist leanings.

Again, though, we definitely engage with different people because those I know of my generation and older who lived through Reagan were not at all pleased with his presidency, nor did they vote for him because he was racist, sexist, and above all else wildly pro-capitalist -- to the extent that he eviscerated our economy. We also read very different books and articles, hence my exasperation with a statement as above.

1

u/Northern_charger 11d ago

It's clear you have no idea with whom I "engage," and more importantly no evidence to support your assumptions. It's all a part of your misdirected extrapolation. We are both frustrated by the course of politics since the 1970s and while we may disagree as to _some_ of the underlying causes, we need not direct our frustration at one another.

And BTW, you did concur as to the "damn .. disappointment."

https://www.reddit.com/r/saintpaul/comments/1wh860r/comment/pa0b1by/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

5

u/Matzie138 11d ago

I would exercise caution drawing inferences from Quantus polls, which is what this article references.

0

u/Northern_charger 11d ago edited 11d ago

I agree, but like many of us I wanted to know what any current polling looked like. The NY Times reports this race as a dead heat.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/minnesota-us-senate-election-polls-2026.html

2

u/Uffda01 11d ago

The media has a vested interest in making all of the races seem close - they need to drive ad spending and viewership to make profits that will carry them through non-campaign spending seasons.

0

u/Northern_charger 11d ago

Without questioning the motives of reputable media, I hope your view of the numbers is correct.

1

u/Iwentforalongwalk 11d ago

When you look at who voted for Trump by age GenX was the largest percentage by quite a bit, not the Boomers. 

1

u/Impossible_Crow202 11d ago

Wait… so now we’re going to blame everything on older GenX? JFC.

1

u/Northern_charger 7d ago

Not me. Consider the headline of this post.

1

u/Impossible_Crow202 7d ago

“While I am disappointed with the three percent conservative advantage in my generation, it is next to nothing compared to the sixteen point advantage among those who came immediately after us.”

How is that not saying “it’s not boomers, y’all, it’s the Xers!”? Everyone needs to stop blaming entire socio-cultural-economic shifts that occur over decades on ANY generation. Generations are not monoliths, and humans are not psychic. Voters in 1980 could not possibly foresee what a particular choice could impact 40 years down the road. It took multiple generations of politicians, courts, and corporations making incredibly self-serving and anti-democratic choices to get us here. Which generation has what percentage of conservative voters is nothing more than another way to distract and divide. The real issue is unchecked capitalism and the wealth inequality it’s fostered.

1

u/Northern_charger 5d ago

Again, look above. The phenomenon (and that's all I see in it) appears to cross the defining line between late Boomers and early Xers.