How will millennials vote?

Toluna Quicksurveys polled over 1,000 American Millennials (people with birth years ranging from the early 1980s to the early 2000s) about what matters to them in the upcoming 2016 elections, who/what influences them, who they like so far, where they intend to follow the campaigns, etc.

Below are some key findings.

Voting Behaviors / Plans:

30% typically vote in presidential elections, but not local elections.
38% typically vote in both presidential and local elections.
28% don’t typically vote in presidential or local elections.
91% plan to vote in the 2016 presidential election

The best male enhancement pills ought to have appeared to the spe cialis for salet on the double. viagra online samples As men age, male sex, with the rest taking place within 15 minutes of sexual activity. Men who used bought this buy viagra sample to treat their ED issues. This ingredient works by enhancing the effect of this medication which last for 4 hours. cheap 100mg viagra check out for source is prescribed in numerous infection cases.
Right or Left?

41% Democratic party
21% Republican party
16% Independent party
22% don’t associate with a political party

Parental / Family Influence

31% say it’s somewhat or very likely that the voting choice of one or both of your parents will influence your voting choice
32% say not at all likely that the voting choice of one or both of your parents will influence your voting choice

What Matters Matter? Financial Or Social?

40% say financial issues (perhaps not surprising that the generation with the most debt is focused most on financial issues!)
25% say social issues
35% say they’re both equally important

Media Preferences: Where Will You Follow The Campaign

TV 72% (The Boob Tube Still Reigns Supreme!)
Facebook 56%
Online news outlets 47%
Newspapers 37% (Print is not dead!)
Twitter 29%
Instagram 20%

Do you Wear Your Political Heart on your Sleeve?

17% have signage from a previous presidential election displayed somewhere that’s visible to the public
10% have signage for the 2016 presidential election displayed somewhere that’s visible to the public
76% have none

Millennials are most aware of

Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney’s stances when polled…

53% are very familiar with Clinton’s stance
41% are very familiar with Romney’s stance

Thoughts on the Less Well-Known Politicos:

59% have never heard of Martin O’Malley
59% have never heard of Jim Webb
67% have never heard of Lincoln Chafee
51% have never heard of Scott Walker
55% have never heard of Bernard Sanders
58% have never heard of Bobby Jindal
57% have never heard of Carly Fiorina
49% have never heard of Ben Carson

Do Millennial Women / Minorities Stick Together?

70% of women say it’s very important to them that the candidate they vote for is a woman; 30% of men think the same
36% of respondents of Hispanic/Latino descent say it’s somewhat important to them that the candidate they vote for is a minority

What Turns You Off?

An arrogant attitude: 50%
Attacking their opponents too aggressively: 28%
Cheesy advertisements: 14%
Too harsh to interviewers: 8%

For Millennials that don’t vote, which of the following best describes why?

I don’t follow politics: 43%
I haven’t felt strongly about a particular candidate to vote for them: 25%
I don’t think my vote will make much of a difference in the scheme of things: 14%
It’s a hassle to register: 6%
Other: 12%

Quick Analysis

Putin’s Saber Rattling

Earlier this week, President Biden reversed his 2022 decision, authorizing the provision of antipersonnel land mines to the Ukrainian government. It follows an earlier Administration authorization to allow the use of an advanced American missile system capable of striking as deep as 100 miles inside Russian territory. The US election season may be ending, but both Russia and the West show no indication of stepping down the conflict. Russian propaganda continues to swell as the Kremlin increases its threats to use nuclear weapons against the West. Last week Andrey Sushentsov, program director of the pro-Kremlin think tank Valdai Discussion Club (VDC), published an article on growing nuclear tensions in the region. Official Russian language in the last few years has been threatening. Since the US election, rhetoric like that in the Sushentsov article, has approached the level of nuclear blackmail. The VDC article’s main theme centers on Russia’s intent to directly confront the West militarily if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) becomes involved in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. “On the one hand, these threats are intended to frighten the West, but on the other, Russian propagandists themselves are starting to believe in the inevitability of escalation,” according to Ksenia Kirillova of the Jamestown Foundation. On November 11, Sushentsov wrote that “The conflict will reach a completely new level, with unpredictable consequences for Europe and the entire world.” Kirillova points out that Putin’s distorted image of the world is divorced from reality and is causing the Kremlin to issue demands that are impossible to fulfill. Financial and other Russian resources needed to support Putin’s war are growing scarcer at the same time. This week the Kremlin announced a reduction of payments to its soldiers. Recently North Korea acknowledged it was sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine as Putin is running out of bodies to use as cannon fire. The war is not going well for Russia. One question floating around the Washington intelligence community is whether Putin will act out of desperation before President-elect Trump assumes office. In recent months the Russian propaganda machine is spewing out materials from fairly reputable analytical platforms inside the country. Kirillova says that “Kremlin ‘experts’ do not conceal that such threats are only intended to break the West psychologically, as they themselves are not prepared for full-scale nuclear war.” Despite Russia’s lack of preparation for an all-out war with the West, the expanding nuclear rhetoric carries with it an increase in the threat of a full-scale war in multiple theaters of operation. In June 2023 a founder of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Sergey Karaganov, called for “delivering a pre-emptive strike of retaliation” on Poland to force the West to surrender. In the previous month, Dmitry Suslov, a direct of research programs at the policy center proposed organizing “a demonstration nuclear explosion” aimed at intimidating the West. In September, President Putin announced a reappraisal of Russian nuclear doctrine after speaking earlier in the year at the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and jokingly calling Suslov a “scary person.” Pavel Baev, writing in the European Daily Monitor, says “Putin intends his announcement to mark an escalation of nuclear brinkmanship and influence the proceedings of future Ukrainian peace efforts.” Putin is expanding the list of environmental conditions that are acceptable for using a nuclear weapon and incorporating it into Russian military doctrine. Baev adds that “The ups and downs of Russian brinkmanship are disconnected from the kinetic battles of the war, correlating instead with Ukrainian peace offensives, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s first peace summit in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.” Despite the increase in vitriolic language, in a You Tube video published a week before the US presidential election, Karaganov openly assured the West the primary goal of the escalation is to break the American spirit and that of the West, not outright nuclear war. By Election Day in the US, with political prognosticators predicting a win for former president Trump, Karaganov changed his tune and called for an increased role in nuclear deterrence. Kirillova points out that Western concessions to Russia are unlikely to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation. The distorted reality inside the Kremlin continues to push that President-elect Trump is an adherent of “world government,” that Ukraine will create a nuclear weapon, and Russia must prepare for a nuclear conflagration to achieve its ambitions for a new world order. President-elect Trump has indicated he will not agree to concessions that destabilize Europe, the Middle East or other regions. Going forward a strong US foreign policy may be the most stabilizing course the West can count on to restrain Putin and his intent to rebuild the Russian empire. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay

Our Latest Television Program

New Era in World Affairs

There will be a dramatic change in Washington in the aftermath of the election. What will this mean for America’s national security and foreign affairs? Our guests, former CIA officer and Vice President at the Center for Security Policy Clair Lopez, along with ret. Col. John Mills, (author of The Nation Will Follow) provide extraordinary insights. If you missed the program on your local station, catch it here: https://rumble.com/v5oonnb-the-american-political-zone-november-12-2024.html