A new trend, in what Politico’s Eamon Javers calls “fickleness” among consumers and voters, is causing grief among advertisers and pollsters alike. Javers suggests the American people are now, “less beholden to old attachments and more willing to make dramatic changes in lifestyle and preferences.”

Javers points to a series of examples ranging from switching cell phone providers to the increasing divorce rate among marriages of 50 plus years to the overnight popularity of Barack Obama and his administration. The implications of such trends are unclear, but such a drastic change in the collective social behavior could be threatening to the traditional American political system.

There are indicators that the erratic nature of public thought and opinion has forced those invested in political outcomes to be more creative and innovative, in order to maintain an edge.  This has lead to a push for politicians to create an active presence on social networking sites like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.  These outlets have allowed politicians to speak directly to their constituents and voters on pressing issues – providing immediate feedback and opinion before they even vote on a piece of legislation.

Javers uses Apple’s destruction of the iPod (with the introduction of the iPhone and iTouch) as an example of a corporate strategy that encourages the death of loyalty to a flagship product for another newer and better product. Political trends often ride in the wake of private sector trends.  If such movement is as rampant as Javers claims, and companies are feeding into this rapid change trend, political behavior and political tactics are sure to follow. Could loyalty to a party or cause become a thing of the past?  Could voters’ never ceasing hunger for new issues and new leaders change the way parties and political movements operate?

The concept of voters looking for the next big thing, could effectively weaken a long-term party or political agenda.  This could make it difficult for legislators to collaborate and make actual progress. A major effect could be the increase in ever-changing interests leading to the decentralizing of coalitions and parties (i.e. the current healthcare debate).  This also raises the question: will today’s issue matter come November?

Politicians’ careers might become endangered if they stick to principles.  They might find longevity by becoming dependent upon keeping up with fast evolving voter opinion. This is in the same vein as obsessing over polls or following the wind.

Be on the lookout for parties rolling out agenda’s as fast Apple operating systems.

From Jan. 2 to May 5, 2009, Gallup conducted a survey of 123,890 national adults, aged 18 and older, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking.

While the overall findings of the survey aren’t surprising, with Democratic partisanship holding a majority of support across the board, especially with younger voters, Gallup’s breakout analysis does give some greater insight into age and generational breaks.

What I like best about this survey is the massive amount of interviews conducted.  This allows for a high confidence level across all age and generational breaks.

Here are the findings of the Gallup Survey as summarized by Gallup’s FRANK NEWPORT:

PART 1: PARTY ID BY AGE BREAK

•Democrats currently enjoy a party identification advantage over Republicans among Americans at every age between 18 to 85.

•The Democrats’ greatest advantages come among those in their 20s and baby boomers in their late 40s and 50s.

•Republicans, on the other hand, come closest to parity with Democrats among Generation Xers in their late 30s and early 40s and among seniors in their late 60s.

INDEPENDENT

•The percentage of Americans who identify as Democrats follows still a different path.

•Democrats are quite strong among the youngest Americans, particularly those under age 24, among whom more identify as Democrats than independents.

•The percent Democrat stays at about the one-third mark until about age 45, when it climbs slightly and remains higher through the 50s and early 60s.

•From that point on, the percent Democrat hovers around the 40% point, although there is quite a bit of fluctuation from age to age for Americans in their late 60s, 70s, and early 80s.

AGE DEMO SUMMARY

•Republicans do relatively well (although are still at a net disadvantage) among Generation X’ers.

GENERATION Y - Generation Y (18 to 29) clearly is skewed fairly strongly in the direction of being either independent or Democratic in political orientation. This group constitutes a significant weakness for the Republican Party.

GENERATION X - Generation X (30 to 44) includes some of the strongest support for Republicans. For whatever reasons, the Democratic over Republican gap among Generation Xers, particularly those ages 37 to 43 at the heart of this generation, is on a relative basis much closer to parity than for any other age group with the exception of those in their late 60s.

Again, for anyone who is a professional or student of politics, these findings are not shocking.  There are normal partisan shifts a few years and every few generations in politics.

The most important factor is understanding the socio-cultural issues and the  events that impact a generation, which usually will convey a partisan disposition toward one party or another.  This overall party pre-disposition is also heavily impacted by the perceived performance of the president in power when the voter turned 18, the voting age in America.

The most important voting sector to political operatives and strategists are the voters that tend to shift with fluctuations in party performance and alignment with voters values and beliefs, regardless of their generational pre-disposition.

Public Opinion Strategies‘ GENE ULM has a blog post up on the fairly new POS’ company blog, TQIA (short for: Turning Questions Into Answers).

Ulm’s post, titled, More Misery (Index) is an interesting analysis of mid-term election House / Senate seat wins and loss projections measured from two distinct variables; the party in power and the consumer Misery Index, an equation often used by economists to measure the positive or negative direction of public security and satisfaction.

Normally, pundits just refer to the historical data of presidential incumbency approval ratings to draw projections about mid-term elections.  Ulm’s analysis using economic data adds an important component, especially useful when economic and prosperity issues are currently top of mind for voters.

Ulm’s overall conclusion supports the opinion that the party in power typically suffers mid-term losses when the Misery Index ranks high, especially in double digits.  Needless to say, this is exactly where our current Misery Index rating is headed.

Read Ulm’s post here to view his findings: http://blog.pos.org/2009/03/more-misery-index/

(Sorry: linking tool appears to be disabled so I opted to post the full URL)