@sellsoldstough wrote:
"IF the other 64% had registered and voted (either directly or by proxy), that would be 3.68 million more votes."
That would be to assume that 100% of those in that age group who were eligible to vote would have done so, would it not?
If so, then your final figure would be a bit too high. How about re-doing the calculation using 75%, or whatever the turnout of the remainder (not the population as a whole because that figure was skewed by the low % of 18-24s) of the poulation was?
But your argument is a strong one nevertheless, and does highlight the difficulty of making democracy work.
But going off on a bit of a tangent for now, was it sufficient to just ask yes or no, in or out? It is now becoming apparent that the question was too simple. An opportunity was missed to find out what the public will is concerning whether the negotiations should be about leaving the single market or staying in, and whether we are OK with free movement for EU citizens or not?
The 3.68 million would assume that the entire population number in that age group would be eligible to vote, so I took 9.5% off that (to 3.33 million) as I don’t know if all of them would be eligible to register, some may be permanently living here but do not yet have citizenship. But then, yes, all of the remaining 3.33 million would have had to vote. I was looking for the potential for that youngest age group to change the vote, assuming a full turnout. Calculations at 75% turnout to follow.
The difference between the electorate (46.5million) and the population above 18 years old (51.39 million), i.e. 4.89 million, must be (I presume) a combination of those who are not eligible to register and those that are but haven’t registered. The 9.5% off might be a generous figure (underestimating the number that could have voted if they wanted) because it also includes a proportion of those that have not registered across all age groups as well as those who can’t, and as you say it might skewed by the youngest group. Also, to give them some benefit of the doubt I used the low variant population data from ONS which has lower population numbers for each age group than the High Population Variant.
If I assume that the turnout of this group could have been 75% as you suggested, the extra votes would be approximately 2.5 million. If these votes were split 75:25 Remain to Leave (some polls say 72% for Remain) there would have been approx 1.88 million additional Remain and 0.62million Leave votes, bringing the totals neck and neck at approximately 18 million each.
But if we also consider the next youngest age group 25-34, in which remain was the winner, turnout was also poor (estimated as 58%, Sky data) compared with older voters, and there is less excuse for that age group to be apathetic. Unfortunately I can't find estimates from poll data which says which way this group voted, but the 25-49 group are estimated to have voted 56% remain. As a rough, but I think reasonable, estimate let’s give the 25-34 group 64% to remain.
The Low Variant population estimate for this 10 year group is 8.89 million. Take off 9.5% for possible non-eligibility (although it also includes unregistered) leaves 8.05 million. 42% of this group didn’t vote. That is, 3.38 million unused votes. Since 100% turnout is not feasible, but I think that 75% is feasible for such an important vote for their future, this would leave 2.54 million votes. Assuming a 64% split of Remain to Leave his would give 1.63 million more votes for remain and 0.64 million for Leave. Add this to the neck and neck vote of approx. 18 million each to Remain and Leave if the 18-24 group had voted with a 75% turnout there would have been approx. 19.63 million votes to Remain and 18.63 million votes to Leave out of a total of approx. 38.26 million votes, which would have given remain about 51.3% of the result.
Yes, I know there can only be estimations from Poll Data which are not exact, but from these rough calculations it looks as if the generation under 35 years old could have got the result they say they wanted if they had shown a 75% turnout, the same as the turnout for 45-54 year olds. Not unreasonable given that the two older age groups older groups of 55-64 and 65+ had higher estimated turnouts of 81% and 83% respectively (Sky Data).
So instead of saying things like the older generation are traitors and have gambled with their future so they have a right to feel angry, the result they wanted was within their power, especially this time as each vote counted, unlike the general elections. Next time I hear the young oldie-bashing in the pub, I'm going to have to tell them that their future was as much in their hands as everyone else's.
It’s a shame they feel betrayed, and I have said elsewhere that there needs to be some education about politics and democracy in schools and colleges. But there were warnings in the media and they were urged to vote back in April and May. They could have made it happen.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/02/eu-referendum-young-voters-brexit-leave
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/07/david-cameron-eu-referendum-young-people-vote
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/14/eu-referendum-youth-vote-registration-countdown
All that we are is what we have thought.
