Reason-Rupe Public Opinion Survey

Millennials Plan to Vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016; Prefer Rand Paul Among Republican Candidates

|

Millennials like Hillary Clinton, according to the latest Reason-Rupe poll of millennials. Among likely millennial voters, 53 percent plan to vote for her if she runs for president in 2016.[1]Even though they see themselves as closer to Republican Gov. Chris Christie on economics, they perceive to be closer to Clinton on social issues. Ultimately they are planning to vote for Clinton. There is also reason to believe that social issues are largely driving the wedge between young people and Republicans.

Part of Clinton's popularly is undoubtedly related to her heightened name recognition. But most of the Democratic candidates asked about in the survey receive more "yes" votes than votes against them. Vice President Joe Biden comes in second with 30 percent and Elizabeth Warren with 22 percent.(Survey respondents could select more than one candidate).

 

Every Republican candidate is underwater receiving more "no" votes than votes in favor. Rand Paul receives the most votes of any Republican candidate (17 percent) and is the least underwater of the Republicans (-12 percent) among likely voters.

Name recognition helps potential Democratic presidential candidates more than Republican candidates. The more familiar millennials are with Democrats, the more likely they are to say they'd vote for them; the effect is muted among Republican candidates.

Overall, 45 percent of likely millennial voters indicate they would vote for at least one Republican presidential candidate and 66 percent would vote for at least one Democratic candidate offered.

When likely millennial voters were asked to select their first choice for president, the top five vote-getters include three Democrats—Hillary Clinton (39%), Elizabeth Warren (9%), and Joe Biden (7%) —followed by two Republicans, Rand Paul (6%) and Paul Ryan (6%).

Fifty-seven percent of Democratic likely voters prefer Hillary Clinton, followed by 15 percent who select Elizabeth Warren. A plurality of independent likely voters also select Hillary Clinton (34%), followed by Gary Johnson (10%), and Rand Paul (9%).

The top vote-getters among Republican likely voters are Rand Paul and Paul Ryan, who tie at 14 percent. Mike Huckabee comes in next with 13 percent, followed by Chris Christie with 12 percent, a virtual four-way tie.

The steep Democratic voting advantage among this cohort,despite their being fiscal centrists, shows that millennials' social liberalism may be a key driver behind their Democratic voting preferences.


[1] The Reason-Rupe poll asked millennials to select from a list of 15 possible presidential candidates whom they would be willing to vote for and then which candidates they would not vote for in 2016.

Download the PDF

To learn more about millennials, check out Reason-Rupe's new report.

Advertisement

NEXT: 'This Is What Happens When You Call the Cops' Rap: Catchy, True, Sad

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This would matter a lot more if the under 30 turnout wasn’t in the ~30% range

    1. But young people are totally going to be motivated to go vote for a 70 year old harridan, right?

      1. Why would they vote for your mom? Is she running?

        1. The difference between Hillary and your mom is that I totally boned your mom.

          1. Who hasn’t? Besides FoE, that is.

            1. I’m pretty surprised your mother isn’t into Fist(ing).

              1. She went through that fad years ago. Besides, it takes, uh…more than a fist at this point anyway.

                1. Ohhh. I’d love to try out my new maneuver on here. I call it the ol’ “Latvian Trousers”.

                2. Like tossing a hotdog down a hallway!!!

  2. So all that stuff about them caring about economic liberty and fiscal conservatism was a bunch of smoke being blown up someone’s ass. Well, we already knew that.

    1. It makes me want to start handing out copies of Hazlitt’s Econ in One Lesson on college campuses everywhere.

      Whatever system you want to put in place to solve whatever problem, it needs to be a sustainable system. In order to design a sustainable system, you have to have a good understanding of economics. Otherwise, you’ll end up designing a Ponzi scheme.

      Any political ideology that’s going to be implemented on any level, needs to be backed by good economics if it’s to have any chance of succeeded in the long term.

      1. “The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”

        ? Thomas Sowell

        1. Who?
          /millennials everywhere.

          1. Me: “Thomas Sowell is a black conservative.”

            Supposedly tolerant “liberals” of my generation (read: 90% of my cogenerationalists): “OMGZ, we MUST LYNCH HIM!!!1!!!”

            1. Yeah and they’ll call Sowell an “Uncle Tom” because they’ve never been above using grotesque racial generalizations when it suits their argument.

    2. Joe Biden I get, that would be hilarious. But Hillary at #1 and then Warren at #3? What a bunch of dunces.

    3. I’ve never known a general group of people to be more ignorant about economics than millenials. The most aggravating part, I used to be lumped in as “Gen Y”, and now that term is out of favor so we 28-30 year olds are now considered millennials too. There oughta be a law preventing anyone born before 1990 from being labeled a millenial.

      1. Again, it is worth pointing out that these millennials have seen GOP economics at work 2001-09 and apparently are not very impressed.

        1. You yourself couldn’t identify “GOP economics” if it was beating you with a floppy dildo.

          Is this where you tell us fairy-tales about ‘austerity’ and ‘laissez faire’ polices that they’ve so consistently applied?

          1. You’ve obviously mistaken me for another.

            I favor “austerity” in the form of Simpson-Bowles – our only chance which the House threw up on.

            1. Ohhh I see. I didn’t realize that you favored the symbolic gesture of decreasing an expected hypothetical increase and then complimented by increased taxes. Nevermind all the disingenuous crap logrolled into the bill. This changes my outlook on everything I’ve learned about you in particular and worthless gestures in general. Disingenuous schemes are good policy! Thanks buttplug

            2. Simpson-Bowles

              A quick search on that says Krugman hates it, so it’s probably a good plan.

              1. If you like tax cuts and entitlement cuts it is good.

              2. It raises taxes in lots of areas. Krugman doesn’t like it because it cuts certain taxes and doesn’t raise others enough in his view. I have yet to meet a resolution passed by the federal legislature that I didn’t want to urinate upon. Aside from a couple post-Bill-o-Rights Constitutional Amendment I suppose.

                Even on the off chance they lower taxes, they never fail to seize the opportunity to logroll unrelated assaults on freedom into their laws.

                1. S-B lowers the top rate to 27% iirc. Maybe even 25%. It raises capital gains to match. It eliminates the sacred deductions.

                  Anyway Tom Coburn voted for it in committee. Mr. Debt Will Kill Us (and he is right).

                  1. Reliable lefties like Mark Kleiman hated Simpson-Bowles. (Prof. Weed called it “a dog’s breakfast.”)

                    The runaway rate of entitlement spending growth truly is a “sea of red” under which we’ll “drown,” as per Mitch Daniels.

                    Here’s one lefty idea I’d be willing to put up with: take the cap off of FICA taxes. You like your SS payments? You can pay the damn payroll tax well above $110K or whatever it is…

                    1. I’ve never met a tax I wanted to continue existing, let alone increase.

          2. Please stop interacting with it.

            It’s not sentient.

            It’s little more than a biological version of a chat bot, and when you interact with it, you are being cruel to it; giving it the idea that it’s actually successfully aping humanity.

        2. “Again, it is worth pointing out that these millennials have seen GOP economics at work 2001-09”

          Define: GOP economics at work 2001-09

          Are you suggesting, Booooooooosh!?!

          1. Can you blame them for closely associating the GOP with Bush/Cheney?

            Especially when there is another Bush lined up for 2016?

            1. And the definition of “GOP economics at work 2001-09”, is Boooooosh!?!

              1. Absolutely. Bush in the executive, DeLay as Speaker, and Frist as Senate leader – the GOP had a hammerlock on government until 2007.

                1. So then, how is Booosh! an implemented economic policy. I’m genuinely curious to see that mental double gainer twist..

            2. I would like to see your explanation of “GOP economics”. How can we vilify human freedom today?

              1. My definition of GOP economics is not important in this context. The subject is how millennials view candidates given their shorter lives to date. They don’t remember Coolidge or Reagan.

                1. GOP economics is weird tax cuts that you Millenials wouldn’t have felt (e.g., cutting the tax on dividends, a one-time $600 credit, addition of a new bracket)

                  and

                  never, ever, EVER giving a shit about the deficit.

                  Also: Medicare Part D.

                  tl;dr – The Millenials are correct to perceive GOP economics as a ginormous clusterfuck.

                  1. Regardless of whether I agree with your summary, I thank you for a coherent answer… something that seems to elude PB.

                  2. GOP economics are an enormous clusterfuck. But GOP economics is not Austrian school, it’s not even Chicago school or any other ostensibly laissez faire philosophy. So to cite the GOP as proof of the failure of free markets is, well, just going full retard.

                  3. “GOP economics is weird tax cuts that you Millenials wouldn’t have felt…”

                    Because Millenials would never be affected by tax policy unless it fell on them.

                  4. Not to defend the GOP or Bush, but the “Bush tax cuts” went disproportionately to lower income groups. The rich ended up paying a higher percentage of taxes than before.

          2. GOP economics at work 2001-09

            You like GDP, so lets go to the GDP tape.

            GDP growth from 2001 – 2008 (I see no reason to include a year when BOOOOSH was in office for three weeks) was, wait for it:

            17%, or 2.125%/year on average.

            @009 – 2013 was:

            6.2%, or 1.24%/year on average.

        3. Because the “economics” of 2009-2014 are SO FUCKING DIFFERENT!! THEY SEE THE GREATNESS AND WANT MORE!!

          ITS LIKE ‘WOW, LOOK AT HOW OBAMA CREATED SO MANY JOBSES AND GAVE US THE HEALTHCARES!! YAY WE HAVE OUR FUTURES BACK!”

          1. Precisely. Why vote GOP then?

            At least you get the gay/abortion/secular/contraception/pot good side by voting Dem.

            1. Voting democrat is a vote for the further regression of mankind into state worship and the quashing of human freedom. As the GOP falls short on it’s economic rhetoric, so does the Democratic party fall short on it’s vague support for freedom on all counts.

              1. Ya, go watch Road Warrior again…you apocalyptic assholes have been promising me a full on societal breakdown for about 50 years now. I’m still waiting on my porch with my riot sweeper…where the fuck is your apocalypse?

            2. I hate to agree with shrike, but he/she/it makes a good point. Recent GOP economics haven’t been that much different than Dem economics. Maybe they are marginally less shitty, but not in any capacity that would fix our broken system.

              The tards in my joke of a generation tend to vote solely on social issues because apparently they care more about gay people getting married than having a job.

              This is where the GOP needs to go full libertarian. Run on a platform of a sound economy AND the social shit too. Imagine a presidential debate where the Dem can’t hamstring the Repub with feel good bullshit.

              They won’t of course. ROMNEY/PALIN 2016

              1. Romney and Palin are each of them idiot/fascist Huge government morons…are you fucking kidding me?

            3. You’re saying, “Democrats are shit on the economy”, but at least they’re ‘gay friendly’?

              That’s your best-case sales pitch?

              What if i care more about cutting taxes than unisex toilets, moron?

              1. “What if i care more about cutting taxes than unisex toilets, moron?”

                Then they’ll assume that they just haven’t found the right angle to buy your vote yet. In both parties minds.. everybody’s principals/principles are for $ale…

          2. It’s funny that “Hope” was half his campaign slogan. It’s been one thing hes been especially good at killing.

          3. Are their prices Sofa King low?

        4. Again, it is worth pointing out that these millennials have seen GOP economics at work 2001-09 and apparently are not very impressed.

          Conversely older people, with which she is less popular, remember Hilary.

      2. a law preventing anyone born before 1990 from being labeled a millennial.

        Gen X called…and we don’t fucking want you!!

        1. That’s fine. We’ll take a generational designation spanning 5 years. Just not the millenials, please.

      3. I just love supposed Libertarians who run around saying there “out to be a law” about shit. I really don’t think any group wants you, you go in that dipshit moron group: the dipshit morons support X, they hat X, etc etc, every candidate, cause etc you idiots support is doomed to failure because no one wants to be associated with you.

    4. So all that stuff about them caring about economic liberty and fiscal conservatism was a bunch of smoke being blown up someone’s ass.

      Or maybe they just don’t share your definitions of those things, Sarc. Sure they vote in small numbers now, but as they age they will vote in ever-larger numbers. Rather than shaking your fist and telling those damn kids to get off your lawn, maybe you should devise a strategy to make your message more appealing to them, or figure out what you can compromise on if you actually want to break the duopoly.

      1. I was a major lib/progressive when I was in my teens/20’s. Things change.

      2. Or maybe they just don’t share your definitions of those things, Sarc.

        Tell me, what definition of economic liberty and fiscal conservatism includes more spending, more debt, more regulation, and more government control?

        1. “…what definition of economic liberty and fiscal conservatism includes more spending, more debt, more regulation, and more government control?”

          The Republican parties…after all we have to pay for all of your wars.

  3. “Millennials Plan to Vote for conniving bitch in 2016; but, would settle for fat slob… and, in other news..”

  4. No breakdown by gender?

  5. If Joe Biden was the #1 on the ticket I would seriously consider voting for him regardless of the comp. just simply for the lulz. Watching the media hem and haw about how we shouldn’t be offended by whatever insensitive thing he said this 5 min. would be awesome.

  6. Elizabeth Warren?

    oh come the fuck on already.

    Speaking of disasters self-inflicted via socialism, Venezuela now has a shortage of water.

    http://online.wsj.com/articles…..1404849526

    1. You don’t get any dumber than Elizabeth Warren unless you consider the dumbfucks who find her appealing.

      1. “Who’s the more foolish? The fool? Or the fool who follows him?”

        1. the plurality of fools, for certain. Less visible than their leader, but every bit as dumb.

      2. The squaw did fight to have the interest rate on their college loans cut in half.

        It is rational self-interest to favor her if you’re carrying a six figure loan.

        1. Why, she seeks to put the taxpayer on the hook for those loan defaults anyway. What does the percentage matter after that?

          1. It’s funny because the biggest single asset in the fed’s asset column is the $1 trillion its owed in student loan debt (land, buildings, and M&E are only $900 billion).

            1. Debt is a creditor’s problem, and make no mistake… *WE* are the creditors..

        2. It’s in my rational self-interest to see the institutions responsible for nationalizing student loans be drawn and quartered.

    2. I don’t know a single person, of any age, who even can identify who Elizabeth Warren is. (Admittedly, I don’t live in Massholechusetts.)

      1. That might be the most telling thing. Biden and Hillary might have gotten a lot of yehs because they are the most nationally known. But Warren beating anybody is completely laughable.

        1. I dunno. I’ve listened to that woman talk and she’s got the emotional appeal down pat. Can’t understand what she is actually saying, since it’s a bunch of populist crap based upon false premises, but it sure feels convincing. I mean, she cares soooo much!

      2. Seriously? My god you must be a dumb-shit. Get out of the outhouse Zeke!!!

    3. No, Warren is a force to be reckoned with as she’s the annointed standard-bearer of the Proggies. She won’t win the nomination in 2016, but will run both for the experience and to move her party’s platform as far left as possible.

      Warren will then run again in the next presidential election in which there is not a sitting president of her party who is eligible for re-election.

  7. Generational collectivism continues to be amazingly stupid. Film at 11.

    1. Your generation always says that!

    2. Are you suggesting that an alleged random sample of a specific age group, doesn’t accurately represent the monolithic nature of an entire generation?

    3. Totally agree, I think these kinds of “Polls” etc are mainly diversions and click generator.

  8. Huckabee is enormously popular in the 65+ set but takes a beating among the millennials at -23%.

    Seriously, the GOP of today has to die.

    1. It is. The evangelical faction has cost them too many elections for the coalition not to come unglued.

      1. Whats your expectation of the number of years that another party would come into place?

        25, 30, 40 years?

        1. Doesn’t really matter. The coalition is going irreversibly change within 10 years, it doesn’t matter if they fly a different color banner or not.

        2. There is going to be an internal realignment in at least one of the major parties.

          1. You are probably right. Do you think there is any chance of a strong (or stronger) Libertarian party coming out of that realignment?

      2. You nailed it, FS.

      3. Actually, I believe the coalition began to die when Jerry Falwell died. McCain would never have gotten the nomination had the socons had as much power as they did when they helped W win. Then Romney? I’m convinced that the socon era is mostly dead.

        Now, will the Repubs move back to classical liberalism? No.

    2. Seriously, the GOP of today has to die.

      Huckabee holds no office and lost all attempts at becoming a presidential candidate.

      He is not the GOP of today or yesterday. He is the GOP of never was.

      1. Seriously, the GOP of today has to die.

        Just so its a murder/suicide with the Dems.

        I don’t even care which is the suicide.

    3. I’m a little bit intrigued at why Gary Johnson garners 9%. Is his name recognition really that high? Or are the kids mistaken in thinking they know who he is?

      1. I think 8.9% vote for him just because his name sounds black.

        The sad thing, I’m not joking. I really think that. God my generation is so fucking vapid.

        1. If his name was ‘black’ it would feature a dumbfuck first name, followed by a common English name. Like, DaGary Johnson, Moheesha Jackson, Tradelvin Cooper. Laqueel Smith. Trayvon…

          Gary’s first name sounds white enough to me. I hereby free you from your worry that 8.9% of the people will accidentally vote for him for that reason.

          1. Well you would know about dumbfuck that’s for sure…

  9. So did Santorum slip through the crack?

    1. I see what you did there

    2. I see what you did there… I think.

    3. Doesn’t it always? It has a high viscosity, right?

      1. Depends on the impurity concentrations…

      2. Viscosity is analogous to resistance to flow. Low viscosity fluids are more likely to slip through cracks. Honey at room temperature is viscous, water is much less so.

        1. Like I said to your mom, Brett, when she asked me why I spread those vicious lies? Because she didn’t spread those viscous thighs.

          1. So you didn’t actually have sex with Brett’s mom and not call her after?

  10. “they see themselves as closer to Republican Gov. Chris Christie on economics”

    SAYS YOU

    *They* don’t know fuck-all about ‘economics’ and what you’re measuring is something they don’t actually think much about. What they know about Chris Christie could probably be summed up as, “Fat man”

    1. Well he makes for an easy target to shoot for that’s for sure.

  11. This millennial is going to vote for a straight alt-text ticket.

  12. There is one thing missing from all these polls and it’s bugging me: non-response bias. How many are actually answering these things? I postulate that my admittedly dumbfuck generation is more apathetic than stupid, but the stupidest part is most the part that bothers to answer. The low voter turnout kind of backs my speculation, no?

    1. 2,000 young adults ages 18-29 between February 28 and March 11,
      2014. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3.4%.

      1. Thanks but that doesn’t tell us the non-response bias. Maybe they asked 4500 people and the people who didn’t respond aren’t prog douches. Possibly.

        1. I hope your Millenial Apathy Theorem is true. That means there’s hope for society after all and maybe even a bit of dissatisfaction with institutions of democracy.

          1. Totally anecdotal, but in my experience the people my age who do care about politics enough to talk about it randomly/answer polls about it/etc are much more likely to be douches (and also prog) than those that don’t.

            Since this seems to hold for all age groups, that’s not too surprising.

            1. so the overlap between progs who also happen to be those sitting at home and waiting for the phone to ting is greater than those of other political persuasions? We should probably poll that just to be sure.

            2. If reason.com called me I would probably hang up.

            3. That’s accurate. Most everyone is better at something than someone else, that’s the beauty of the division of labor. When it comes to philosophy and politics, most people are head up their ass level of stupid. But that rarely stops them from having an opinion and promoting it as valid.

              Bad ideas are cheap and cost effective. They require little intellectual discipline to produce. And these bad ideas often help people maximize their resources, like with welfare programs and redistribution schemes. So these bad ideas multiply and fill the world.

              Meanwhile libertarians’ best hope is that eventually people will not be able to profit from bad ideas or maybe even not give enough of a shit to heavily promote their stupidity to others. Apathy is our best ally, hoping people will become rational through the multiplication and spreading of good ideas is hopeless.

              1. Apathy is our best ally

                WRONG. Municipal-level government elections get the lowest turnout and they are the most prog-tastic. Apathy = free pass for statists.

                1. Apathetic individuals don’t tend to lecture you that FDR saved the economeeez. Apathetic individuals not voting is a good thing. Unless you can somehow argue that the expansion of voter rolls to more and more people has been a good thing for liberty.

              2. I never got the whole “if everyone just doesn’t vote, things will change” line of thinking. Someone will vote even if it is only the candidates’ families. DiBlasio just won the mayorship of New York with the worst turnout in history? You think that fat bastard gives a shit? Hell no. It is a mandate and the start of a national full retard Prog wave as far as he was concerned.

                1. I never got the whole “if everyone just doesn’t vote, things will change” line of thinking.

                  That’s not at all what I said. I said things would be better if the people who didn’t know shit about anything weren’t voting. Things would be better if there were far less voters but that’s not what is taught. We are taught that everyone has a voice worth hearing and that’s just nonsense.

                  I don’t rely on a plumber to do dental work for me just like I don’t rely on just any non-felon to secure my life, liberty and property with all their knowledge of economics and moral principals.

                  I never got the whole “if we can just educate voters, things will change” line of thought.

    2. “…but the stupidest part is most the part that bothers to answer.”

      What the fuck does that even mean? Are you fucking stupid or something?

  13. Hillary 2016: Because most people are too dumb to know any better.

    If this poll is accurate, they have earned the generation retard moniker.

    1. Who you got, John? Which goober do you prefer among the Republicans?

      1. Oh Sarah Palin, totally. She is sooooo smart!!!!

  14. they perceive to be closer to Clinton on social issues

    As far as I can tell she has no record for expressing anything about any social issue whatsoever – but she does have a D after her name so there is that. I used to be that age and I remember how that works.

    1. That was my thought too. But also, she’s female.

  15. Millennials Plan to Vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016

    Millennials are like normal people, only dumber.

    Once Hillary opens her mouth on NPR again, this problem is solved.

  16. And contrary to the desperate hopes of some, we will continue to be liberal as we age and take over the country. And we will teach our children about how the Republicans skullfucked the world when we were in college and then how they went full batshit for Jesus and billionaires and actually thought it was a good idea to inflame right-wing extremism against the first black president. And the GOP will be dead.

    1. we will continue to be liberal as we age

      Many will learn to think instead of emote. The ones with a brain that is. So that definitely leaves you out.

      1. We know how to think. Your head is filled with nothing but slogans and the belief that they make you intelligent.

        1. No Tony, you don’t. That’s the thing. I once felt as you do. I know how you feel. Thing is, you don’t know how I think because you don’t know how to think. So you can sit there all smug, feeling like you know, but you don’t. So sad. Sad little emotional Tony.

            1. Because it’s fun to taunt the animals.

          1. God yes, you guys know how to think!! I mean you put W in there. And you almost put Sarah Palin in there, and you kiss Donald Trumps ass every chance you get. Ya, you guys are just thinking fucking machines. I mean that war!! Wow only fucking geniuses could think of that, and letting terrorists attack our cities, wow that showed exceptional intelligence! Or maybe you are all just sad little psychopaths who has no self-reflection, no humility and no conscience.

  17. Stupid is as stupid does.

  18. If Hilary Clinton has support that large all it shows, is, at best, that Millenials are largely apathetic about the political issues they claim to care the most about. If being for “social liberalism” but being against the nanny state are important to you, you don’t land on Hilary freakin’ Clinton as your prime candidate. She is a wind sock on the former and an inveterate micromanager of personal affairs on the latter. I can believe that they don’t know her political positions because she was about the most publicly invisible Secretary of State that I can remember.

    I’m guessing she’s pretty much another cipher to them who is well-known for being well-known.

    1. Ya, I kind of lean to that conclusion as well. Support for her, I think, reflects apathy more than anything else.

  19. Wow, everyone is acting so surprised. Remember this is the generation that gets their news and opinions in 5 minutes segments. They read Gawker, watch the Daily show for news.

    Of course they are going to love Warren and Clinton. They don’t know anything bad about them.

    They aren’t going to do any research. They are just lazy. It’s great when Kimmel makes fun of them.

    1. Ya, your idea of “research” consists of lapping up the Santorum excreted by FOX news

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.