Talking 'bout their generation

[strangedave]

A lot of stats at pollytics shows pretty clearly what you probably suspected -- the in Australia the conservative Coalition parties gets a lot of their support from people that are from older generations. Specifically, their support is much higher among over-60s, who make up over a quarter of the population

Comments

[anxiolytic]

I was pretty surprised when I saw that article the other day just how large the proportion of voters is 60+.

[bardiegrub]

you're assuming that's a cohort effect, not an age effect - maybe we'll all become conservative voters when we become cranky old people?

[strangedave]

No, they address that fairly thoroughly in the article - there is a bump towards getting more conservative in the late 20s-early 30s, but after that it doesn't change that much (and I did get more conservative around that period as far as economics goes, I think, just not drastically so).

But there is also a significantly larger cohort effect of the pre-1947 generation (note, for example, the bias goes very much the other way in people born 1948-1957, who currently loathe the Coalition even more than our generation does, though not quite as much as younger generations, and consistently have liked them a whole lot less since at least the late-80s), and has been gradually marching up the actual age range over the last 8 elections.

[randy_byers]

Interesting. It's the same story here with the Republicans and the Democrats, although I can't find the article I just read that looked at the so-called Millenial generation and they're increasing proportion of the national vote over the next decade. Those that were eligible to vote last year went for Obama and the Democrats in huge numbers. You can also see a huge generational difference over gay rights issues.

It's kind of fascinating to read The Australian, because they're always talking about how Rudd or Swan or whoever in the government has screwed the pooch in some way. Then they report the polling numbers and the ALP is still absolutely crushing the Coalition. It's the one thing they can't spin, I guess.

[strangedave]

The Australian is a sort of political tide-pool, in which the strange conservative creatures are trapped after the tide has gone out. They sort of live in this fantasy world in which Rudds failure to act like Howard is sure evidence that he is just a temporary aberration -- but the polls pretty much show that the Liberal party is dead in the water, and going nowhere with current leadership (even though, the current leadership is still the best option they have).

[ataxi]

Possum has been pushing that barrow for a while now.

Although I can see how the Coalition might be left stranded on the right of the ALP with a vanishing constituency (not that I look forward to the deaths of older generations!), I hope the ALP will be faced with a broader-based policy alternative from its left in the future.

[strangedave]

Possum has been pushing that barrow for a while now
Yep, and I think he is now delivering the statistical analysis that makes it pretty hard to argue with.

I think it is a little beyond simple left/right positioning, and more to it than the ALPs drift to the right, though that is a factor. I think it has a lot to do with the global acceptance of social democracy as the dominant political worldview, and the parties built on values that predate it being less behind.

I certainly do hope the ALP is faced with a broad-based policy alternative, but currently I see that as most likely arising from pressure the ALP Left itself and activist organisations -- I don't think it is likely to come from another political party. The rise of the activist organisation like GetUp here and MoveOn in the US is a notable, and likely permanent, new element in politics, I think.

[ataxi]

I think the perceived failure of Rudd on the "progressive" left's core policy concerns will strengthen the Greens at the next election. That's my take on it. Kev's had his Obama moment and will have support but not celebratory generational momentum at the next vote.

In a sense the GFC has given Rudd and Swan a certain amount of latitude in ignoring that part of the ALP constituency (see deferred and weakened ETS and deferred and weakened parental leave, for example), but that excuse won't continue to work indefinitely.

That obviously doesn't mean the Greens can expect lots of seats in the House of Reps, but they might have a crack at the balance of power in the Senate after the ALP's inevitable return to majority government at the next election.

So I broadly agree that there won't be a serious "third force" in Australian politics, but I'm hoping perhaps ALP+Greens will have the majority in the Senate in a year or two.

[strangedave]

I think the perceived failure of Rudd on the "progressive" left's core policy concerns will strengthen the Greens at the next election.
True. At least, the climate change issue, and Rudds apparent weakness on the issue, will be a big boost to the Greens.

Kev's had his Obama moment and will have support but not celebratory generational momentum at the next vote.
Oh, I think Kev will very likely hold on to his generational momentum, but I think that is about reclaiming the centre from the Libs, and the 2PP vote, and holding back the Greens on the Left is a very different issue. On a 2PP basis, I don't see many signs of the Libs clawing back at this stage.

That obviously doesn't mean the Greens can expect lots of seats in the House of Reps, but they might have a crack at the balance of power in the Senate after the ALP's inevitable return to majority government at the next election.
I very much agree that this is likely.

[tcpip]

Hmmm... I'd like to see one with the Greens as well.

I look forward to a future election where the competition is between Labor and the Greens.

[strangedave]

Of course, the Greens just struck deep into state ALP Left territory by taking Fremantle from the ALP.

And that demonstrates pretty nicely the fly in the ointment of the lefty dream of an ALP vs Greens future, which is that if the Greens expand, it will be at the expense not of the ALP right, but of the ALP Left. The Greens will expand, at least in the short term, by targeting quite left wing seats, the same sort that are the ALP Left heartland, and the result of a growing Greens will be to push the ALP to the right, which will likely lead to dubious results on a national scale. And FWIW I like the ALP left more than I like the Greens on balance, though there are certainly a few issues (like climate change) where the Greens voice is the most valuable.

[tcpip]

Historically though, the ALP left was strongest when the left outside the ALP was stronger with the converse being true. Yes, it does mean that Labor will have to direct campaign resources into "left wing" seats. It also means that they will have to provide genuine left-wing candidates; for too long safe Labor seats are used as a springboard for career members of the right.

[strangedave]

Sure, but I think the dynamics are a bit different here. An organised party to the left of them making a run at lower house seats is something the ALP hasn't had to face in living memory, and I do not think it will necessarily help the Left - a powerful left with no major parliamentary party to channel it into helps the ALP Left, sure, but a powerful left focussed on the Greens is another story. And I worry that the analogous situation in the UK, of a shrinking conservative party and a surging opposition to the left of Labor, was accompanied by a major shift to the right from Labor taking the entire country with it.