Youthful voters who turned out in droves to vote
for Barack Obama in 2008 will still likely favor him this
presidential election, but without the numbers or enthusiasm the
incumbent might wish, says pollster John Zogby. And it’s not just
disillusionment with a candidate who failed to deliver on
impossible promises; Americans in the 18-29 “First Globals” age
bracket are drifting away from the Coke vs. Pepsi battle of
competing authoritarianisms offered by the Democrats and
Republicans, and in a generally libertarian ideological
direction.

Writing at Forbes, Zogby reports that First Globals favor — or,
really, have less disdain for — Democrats over Republicans.
But:

[O]n some key issues, majorities of First Globals are not
doctrinaire liberals. The poll found less than majorities agree
with liberals on   some of their most cherished
beliefs.  For example: 44% agree health insurance is a right
government should provide for those who can’t afford it, 43% agree
with the same statement about food and shelter, 37% agree
government should spend more to reduce poverty, 20% agree
government spending is an effective way to economic growth and 28%
agree government should do more to curb climate change even at the
expense of economic growth. (That last number has to hurt
environmentalists.)

Lest Republicans get too giddy at those findings, they should
also know less than majorities agree with these conservative and
neo-con ideals: 22% agree it’s sometimes necessary to attack
potentially hostile countries rather than waiting until we are
attacked, 23% are willing to give up some personal freedoms for the
sake of national security, 39% agree cutting taxes is an effective
route to economic growth, 24% agree we should eliminate all
barriers to trade, 25% agree recent immigration has done more harm
than good, 21% agree religious values should play an important role
in government and 25% agree homosexuality is morally wrong.

These attitudes betraying both the traditional left and right
fall generally within the bounds of libertarianism.

Zogby’s definition of libertarianism in this context is,
admittedly, really, really broad. Let me add another “really.” But
there’s a strong sense of live and let live in the survey results,
and powerful skepticism aimed at government. A peek at the
Harvard University Institute of Politics survey from which
Zogby draws his numbers is even more encouraging. For instance, for
a cohort among which only a relatively few have begun to deal with
the demands of parenting and dickering with education
bureaucracies, a surprisingly strong (to me) 37% believe “if
parents had more freedom to choose where they could send their
children to school, the education system in this country would be
better.”

Also:

Over the 12 months since our last poll on this subject was
released, of the 15 issues that we
tested, only one has changed outside the margin of error: 18- to
29- year olds have become less supportive of the concept that basic
health insurance is a right for all people, and if
someone has no means of paying for it, the government should
provide it.

The results of a hypothetical three-way presidential matchup
including Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul give “Obama, 41
percent (losing 2 points from a one-on-one matchup); Romney, 18
percent (losing 9 points); Paul, 13 percent with 27 percent
undecided.”

Overall, the survey suggests that, while Zogby may be correct in
seeing a chance of some young voters “abandoning both parties and
instead choosing the Libertarian candidate,” the bigger read is
declining faith in grandiose government solutions, increasing
protectiveness for civil liberties and growing tolerance. That may
not be explicit libertarianism, but I’ll take it.

Let me insert a plug here for this rather interesting book I
stumbled across that seems relevant to this topic:
The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix
What’s Wrong With America. Has anybody heard of
it?