Mediaboss Marketing

On Tuesday, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau unveiled a multi-billion-dollar housing strategy to help Canadians buy a home at a time when the market is sky high. The plan includes measures to curb the practice of "flipping" homes, the banning of so-called "blind bidding" and a promise to double the first-time homebuyers tax credit.

Part of the plan isto introduce a government-funded rent-to-own program to help renters get on the path to home ownership. The party is promising$1 billion in loans and grants to develop rent-to-own projects with partners from the private, not-for-profit and co-op sectors.

If that sounds familiar to Torontonians that's because it is.

In 2018, former mayoral candidate Jennifer Keesmaat proposed a similar program for the city.

While some are praising the proposalas a positive initiative that helps renters who are struggling with a down payment, others say it caters to a niche group of constituents, and that housing supply is what all parties need to focus on to make cities like Toronto more affordable.

"I was actually really pleased when I heard the [Liberals'] announcement," said Keesmaat, a former businesswoman and chief planner for the City of Toronto.

"Because I think what we're beginning to see in this campaign is housing solutions that actually respond to the magnitude of the challenge that we're faced with."

Themagnitude of the challenge Keesmaat is speaking about is enormous.The average price for all home types combined in the Greater Toronto Area as of last monthis$1,062,256up 12.6 per cent compared to July 2020, according to the latest report from the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board.

At the centre of Keesmaat's 2018 campaign for mayor of Toronto was a municipally run rent-to-own program that involvedthe city dedicating a certain number of new units. The proposal would have allowedrenters to apply to pay monthly instalments that would go toward their down payment onthe property at a price set at the start of the agreement.

The funds to support the program would have been generated by a proposed tax on luxury homes.

"Part of why this policy matters is because it's about recognizing that we all have different housing needs and we also have different housing needs at different stages of our lives. And we need lots of options within that entire housing spectrum " said Keesmat.

Keesmat is now the founder of Markee developments which designs, builds, and runs affordable rental housing and says she would welcome the opportunity to work with the federal governmenton a rent-to-own program.But she acknowledges that planalone won't help address the affordability crisis.

"It means nothing if it isn't tied to a really profound supply initiative that's about driving housing supply."

Other experts agree with Keesmaat that housingsupplyis what all federal parties should be focusing on when it comes to addressingaffordability.

"Given that we have a housing crisis across Canada, we need to think millions of new homes at affordable prices. That would make a dent in bringing housing prices in line with people's incomes," said Murtaza Haider,professor of real estate management and data science at Toronto's Ryerson University.

While Haider says ideaslike rent-to-own programs do open up the market for a small group of people, he believes governments need to think bigger.

"It's much better to have some relief than not. But we have to take much bolder, much bigger, much larger programs to be able to have housing prices and rents much in step with people's incomes."

Others question whether that $1 billion would be better spent on measures to help lower-income individuals or families who can't evenget accessto affordable rental housing.

"It's really rental housing that's the big problem. That's where the government should focus its effort," said Frank Clayton, senior research fellow at the Centrefor Urban Research and Land Development at Ryerson University.

Clayton said he worries initiativeslike a federally run rent-to-own program might increase demand, which would drive up real estate prices if there's no parallel effort to build more housing.

"The focus should be on supply, not demand, because demand will just aggravate what's already happening. And that makes things worse."

The plan laid out by the Liberal Party of Canada doesn't spell out whether the loans and grants under the proposed program would go to the landlord or to the tenant, or whether the majority of the $1 billion pledged would go to big cities like Toronto or Vancouver where housing prices have continued to soar.

It also doesn't say how it would work with municipalities who are responsible for the approval of development projects to ensure rent-to-own projects would actually be built, or how it would encouragecurrent landlords to take part in it.

In response to questions fromCBC Toronto, the Liberal Party of Canada said: "There are a variety of existing rent-to-own models and the financial structure of each can vary, as will federal support."

The party added that it is"confident that by partnering with municipalities and providing substantial federal funding, we will be able to incentivize the building of new rent-to-own units across the country."

So far, the Liberals are the only party formally pledging a rent-to-own program, but when it comes to supply they'repledging to "build, preserve or repair 1.4 million homes in the next four years" by giving cities tools to speed up construction. The party isalso promising to create a $4-billion pool of cash that cities could tap if they help to create "middle-class homes."

The NDP is pledging to create at least 500,000 units of affordable housing in the next 10years, while the Conservatives are pledging to build one million homes over three years, andconvert at least 15 per cent of federal government property into housing among other measures.

The Greens are calling for an expansion of the government's Rapid housing Initiative which creates new affordable housing for vulnerable populations and to build and acquire a minimum of 300,000 units of affordable housing.

See more here:
Liberals say they'll bring in a rent-to-own program. But what will it do for Toronto's housing crisis? - CBC.ca

Real-time host Bill Maher awakened liberal by complaining about America by teaching Americans what real oppression would look like at his show on Friday night. Blame.

Maher accuses Americans of constantly complaining that the United States is very oppressed, sexist, and homosexual by emphasizing what viewers should learn from Afghanistan. bottom.

When I saw s ** t go down in Afghanistan, I remembered all the conversations I had with immigrants so far. Almost all of them (if I actually started talking) said, Oh, people. It contained the concept of I dont know. , All you are doing is b **** h and bad mouth about your own country, but if you know about the country I came from, you stop talking for yourself He said.

Real-time host Bill Maher accused him of awakening the liberals for not understanding real oppression and said Americans needed to learn from Afghanistan.

He said the professor disagreed with the students and that it wasnt oppression that the former president was jokingly complaining about, and that Americans needed to ask the maid about the true oppression.

He drew a comparison with his own life when there were two presidents in my a **.

Former President Donald Trump sued him for $ 5 million in a joke comparing him to an orangutan, and former President George W. Bush spokesman Ali Freisher told him to see what they see. rice field [comedians] I said at a press conference.

He admitted that these cases were not fun, but thanked him for knowing that they were safe throughout the experience.

He told the viewer: Neither experience was fun, but I didnt have to worry about being dragged to death behind the Toyota Tacoma. Have a little perspective on how we howl here.

Hopefully, as the Taliban gain more control of the country, refugees are crowding the tarmac and running with U.S. Air Force planes as they move down the runway at Kabul Airport.

Smoke rose in the air after a bombing that killed more than 100 people, including U.S. soldiers and children

He ridiculed awakened liberals because their professors disagreed with them and the only people in the country who lived without water were angry that they lived in California, and hunger. The only people who are are actors in the role.

He continued to list the real problem of women being unable to leave home without parental permission due to harassment and danger, saying that people were killed at astronomical rates in Honduras and the Philippines. rice field.

Im sorry your professor says you dont like it. It wouldnt be a problem for the Taliban because you arent allowed to go to school. In Saudi Arabia, grown-up women are male guardians. Without permission, you may be imprisoned for doing what we think on a daily basis.

If you are the wrong religion, China will curl you up and put you in a camp. In Burkina Faso, more children work than in school. Only 5 percent of Burundians turn on electricity. I have. The murder rate in Honduras is eight times higher than here. The inflation rate in Venezuela is 2,719 percent. In the last five years, the Philippines has killed 27,000 low-level drug dealers. My old job He said.

In North Korea, people starve to death. Here, the only people who are hungry are those who do it for their role, and the only people who do not have water live in California.

If you think America is irreparable, turn on the news or get your passport and get your ticket at one of the rough airlines that carry that web address on the plane.

Afghan refugees are engaged in sardine-like evacuation flights to escape the Taliban violence and oppression in Afghanistan.

Recently, Taliban leaders told Afghan women to stay home because fighters are not trained to respect them. Because it was a requirement when I took over last time.

The Taliban recently tortured and killed Afghan TikTok comedian Nazarmohammad. It aroused Afghan artists afraid of the future of intolerance and convenience to art and humor under the Taliban.

An image of an Afghan mother expecting her baby to be handed over to an army at Kabul Airport on a barbed wire for an evacuation flight is due to desperate parents trying to save their children from living under a group. , Social media and news sites are also flooded.

There is a reason why Afghan mothers are handing us babies, Maher said at the show. And we need to take them. Americans should now take Afghan refugees to their homes and their neighborhoods.

Desperate father hands his little boy to British soldiers at Kabul International Airport

US soldiers rescued the baby from the crowd by pulling the child with barbed wire.Desperate mothers handing children to US and British soldiers in hopes of taking them to an evacuation flight from Kabul

Maher claimed that the Americans were not bad guys and that the country was not corely corrupt because troops were dispatched to stop the crackdown in Afghanistan in 2001.

It doesnt make us bad, were not bad. Oppression is bad, he said.

Repression is what we were trying to stop in Afghanistan. We failed, but any immigrant would say, we were mostly successful here, and still the current state of the awakened ideology. The surge is that from the moment America was founded, its racist, oppressive, sexual, and homosexual. I cant find a host for Oscar or Jepadi, he exclaimed.

Have you heard about honor killings? Decapitation? Throwing homosexuals from the roof? Marriage underage arrangements? Beating a state-licensed wife? Female genital mutilation? Marriage by capture? We have Because it is.

Whats the lesson of Afghanistan? Maybe everyone in a huge dorm room on the internet b **** h-fest session needs to take a closer look at what real oppression looks like. Ask the maid, ask the Uber driver, and get an Asian woman to massage.

America may not be your faculty lounge and Twitters dreamland, but no one here hangs on the plane and tries to escape. No, wait until you get inside the plane and fight. Because they stopped serving drinks!

Bill Maher says the awakened liberals have lost their view of real oppression

Source link Bill Maher says the awakened liberals have lost their view of real oppression

See the original post here:
Bill Maher says the awakened liberals have lost their "view" of "real oppression" - Texasnewstoday.com

The Liberal Party's promises to improve housing affordability includes cutting default insurance premiums, creating a tax-free First Home Savings Account and banning foreign ownership.

Mark Blinch/Reuters

If youre struggling to afford a home, youre probably ticked off at those responsible for Canadas housing crisis.

You might even blame the government. Thats why, with the election just 25 days away, the Liberal Party has rolled out its most ambitious package of housing solutions yet.

But will their proposals really save you money when buying a home in the next five years?

Story continues below advertisement

Below is the Liberals housing agenda decrypted, a look at whats sound, and what seems like hastily conceived election madness.

What doesnt make sense

When you buy a home with just 5 per cent down, you pay 4 per cent of your mortgage in default insurance. Thats too much, the Liberals say. They want to slash that by 25 per cent.

But if default insurance premiums are so high that is, consumers are paying more than what is actuarially justified based on the insurers risk of loss thats a failure of our federal government. They approve these fees.

Policy makers have preached since 2008 that Canada must shelter taxpayers from mortgage insurance risk. Now, despite extreme valuations and high indebtedness, theyre backtracking on this.

The mandarins at the Bank of Canada are probably shaking their heads. Borrowers with both a high loan-to-income ratio and a high loan-to-value ratio are associated with greater risk, the central bank said in May. Should the Liberals lower costs for riskier buyers, reducing taxpayers insurance buffer if home values nosedive?

They fail to acknowledge that when you make it cheaper and easier to get a mortgage, more people buy homes and overpay. How about we stick to solutions that dont exacerbate overvaluation?

Story continues below advertisement

Canadians already have all the home savings vehicles they need: the RRSP Home Buyers Plan and tax-free savings accounts. Less than one in 1,000 Canadian adults (20,250 in 2017, according to CRA data) maxed out their RRSP Home Buyers Plan, and that was when its limit was $10,000 less.

The truth is, Canadians are so overleveraged, underemployed and overtaxed, that most simply cant save fast enough to afford ever-appreciating properties. An FHSA tax shelter would do little more than reduce tax revenue and further lift home prices.

Down payment loans? This one must be a bad joke. How on earth will government down payment loans not spark further appreciation and indebtedness? You might as well just go back to 100-per-cent financing, circa 2007. If home values dive between 20 per cent and 25 per cent some day and people default on those loans en masse, how much will that cost taxpayers?

Lose your job? Dont pay for six months, the Liberals propose.

Unfortunately, financial options arent free. If the government forced deferrals down lenders throats, lenders would promptly raise fees and interest rates, burdening millions of mortgagors, not just the ones who dont pay as agreed.

Borrowers overall would be better off self-insuring risks such as unemployment and relying on lenders existing work-out programs, whereby lenders restructure your terms if you cant pay. And no one should get a mortgage in the first place without emergency cash resources.

Story continues below advertisement

Voters love this idea and thats why career politicians love it. But non-resident ownership is a scapegoat, a drop in the bucket. Its a small, single-digit share of housing and just a tiny fraction of cities have more than 1 per cent foreign ownership, according to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. By closing Canadas doors to international buyers, even temporarily, we risk losing vital non-housing foreign investment. Whats more, offshore buyers dont typically buy working-class homes, and an array of punitive taxes already discourage unproductive ownership.

Investors play an essential role in improving neighbourhoods and fixing up old and dilapidated housing. Details on this are scarce but a policy that discourages renovation of inferior housing stock is ill-considered. The Liberals claim theyll allow sellers to deduct legitimate investments in refurbishment, but if this tax discourages such investment in the first place, Canadians are worse off overall.

What makes good sense

The Liberals want to bribe sorry, incentivize municipalities to grow housing supply faster than their historical average. Its not perfect, but itll help. Federal funding will get more city-level policy makers off their rear ends and working toward solutions. The only problem is the proposed $4-billion and 100,000 homes wont be enough. And as TVO.orgs John Michael McGrath wrote Tuesday, the feds must bribe provinces as well if they hope to build homes quicker.

The Finance Department forbids default insurance on homes valued at $1-million and up. Its almost a crime that this threshold hasnt been adjusted since its inception in June, 2012. Policy makers should have indexed the limit to home values so that low-risk, small-down-payment borrowers across all income strata have a chance at suitable home ownership.

Canadas real estate market desperately needs more transparency. Proposed measures such as open bidding, mandatory inspection periods and transparent public comparable sales data foster efficient home price discovery. Following the complicated implementation and inevitable court challenges, such measures could materially and immediately slow overvaluation.

Story continues below advertisement

Theres little economic reason to allow foreign land-banking of precious land for years on end. For that matter, one might argue that domestic owners who tie up strategic buildable land long-term create similar housing constraints.

What Canadians really need

We will increase the power of federal regulators to respond appropriately to housing price fluctuations to ensure a more stable Canadian housing market, the Liberal plan says. But Canadas housing crisis is not a new problem. The Liberals have been in government for six years. What has their housing oversight team been doing?

If you believe the likes of Scotiabank Economics, which looked at the structural housing shortage in a May report, Canada might have up to 1.8 million housing units too few. What voters need from housing officials and politicians are fewer schemes that fuel buying power, and more policies that directly resolve undersupply.

Robert McLister is mortgage editor at RATESDOTCA and founder of RateSpy.com and intelliMortgage. You can follow him on Twitter at @RateSpy.

Follow this link:
Liberal housing pledge: What makes no sense, what makes good sense and what Canadians really need - The Globe and Mail

Appointing Zak Kirkup WA Liberal leader before the party's March state election disaster was "a desperate and ill-advised move" that should never have happened, according to those tasked with determining what led to the landslide result.

And the authors of that damning internal review lashed the MPs who made the decision to elect Mr Kirkup for their "staggering laziness", finding many of them did not make a single phone call or knock on any doors during that ill-fated campaign.

The 2021 Liberal election review, which pointed to "unethical and underhand" conduct by party members and MPs in calling for sweeping reforms of the party, saved some of its harshest criticisms for the decision to elect Mr Kirkup leader just four months from the election.

"Surely there were better choices for leader," the review, from a three-person panel headed by party elder Danielle Blain, stated.

ABC News: Hugh Sando

"It is difficult to accept there were no other options available for a more senior MP to assume the leadership.

"It should never have happened, and all members of the parliamentary wing who actively encouraged this move must take responsibility for that, as they should for the election result.

"Zak Kirkup was just too inexperienced and perhaps a little overwhelmed."

The review blasted the campaign Mr Kirkup led, saying there was "policy disconnect" and his statement that the party could not win the election "caused much anger and loss of morale".

"[It] critically had a significant negative impact on most of the party candidates standing for election," it stated.

While Mr Kirkup was the MP singled out for the strongest criticism by name, many of the party's most powerful identities were not named in the report.

It comes after more than 700 pages ofmessages between party powerbrokers were leaked to the media, revealinginternal game-playing and branch stacking.

AP: Patrick Sison

Other MPs were also lashed for their failure to appropriately campaign.

In what was labelled "staggering laziness" and "poor performance", four of the 13 MPs did not knock on a single door of a constituent in the four months prior to the election.

And five MPs were not recorded as registering a single phone call during that same period.

Both practices are seen as basics of political campaigning.

Meanwhile, policies such as Mr Kirkup's contentious 'green energy plan' also faced heavy criticism.

"The Liberal Party lost most of its voter base, who deserted it, because of its leadership squabbles, factional activities and loss of principles," the report states.

"The state party lost its way because its members were more concerned about holding power than the power of ideas.

"It failed on both counts."

The rest is here:
Former WA Liberals leader Zak Kirkup bears brunt of scathing internal election review - ABC News

Welcome to Political Outliers, a column that explores groups often portrayed as all voting the same way. In todays climate, its easy to focus on how a group identifies politically, but thats never the full story. Blocs of voters are rarely uniform in their beliefs, which is why this column will dive into undercovered parts of the electorate, showing how diverse and atypical most voters are.

Think you might fit the bill? Fill out this form and we might get in touch.

Mack Bair, 24, supports same-sex marriage. Matthew C., 22, backs marijuana legalization and Luke T., 22, is solidly pro-abortion rights, (both of whom asked to not use their last names out of fear of retribution for their political views). John Henke, 20, says he believes climate change is happening and that humans are playing a role.

At first blush, these young men might seem like progressive voters. But theyre not: All four voted for former President Donald Trump in 2020 and, for those old enough, in 2016 as well.

Theyre all also part of Generation Z, Americas youngest adult generation, which is more ethnically and racially diverse than any generation before it. And similar to millennials, who are now in their mid-20s to early 40s, members of Gen Z are more liberal on a number of key social issues than older generations. According to Pews 2020 verified voter survey, millennials and Gen Zers also backed Biden over Trump in that years election, by a 20-point margin.

But despite the generations overall progressive bent, this hasnt translated into overwhelming Democratic support. In fact, some research suggests that Gen Zers are no more likely to identify as members of the Democratic Party than registered voters in the overall electorate, and a plurality are unwilling to identify with either political party. That means that, despite their overwhelming support of Biden in the presidential election, there is also a small but, so far, solid chunk of Gen Z that identifies as Republican.

To better understand who these voters are and what motivates them to align with a party that has remained conservative on many issues important to Gen Z, I looked at polling data and political science for clues. I also spoke with six Gen-Z voters who voted for Trump and either identify as Republican or lean Republican. What I learned is that most of them break with the mainstream of the Republican Party on many social and cultural issues, but solidly agree with the GOPs stances on the economy. They also think the Democratic Party, as it is now, has veered too far left, specifically with its stances on immigration, gun control and race.

When it comes to Gen-Z Republicans, I think folks need to understand that we dont fit neatly in a box and I think that boggles the media, said Javon Price, 23, a self-described conservative Republican who spoke in his personal capacity but works as a policy analyst for the America First Policy Institute, a nonprofit group allied with Trump that promotes the former presidents policies. Were normal everyday people like everybody else, and political beliefs arent the end-all be-all.

Republicans in this generation are more likely to take what they call libertarian approaches to social issues like same-sex marriage, and surveys show that these young Republicans are more likely to care about cancel culture than the electorate as a whole. Theyre also overwhelmingly white and male. But despite being more liberal on social issues than older Republicans, most of the young Republicans I spoke with admitted to me that they dont see themselves ever leaving the GOP. And if Trump runs for president in 2024 and wins his partys primary, most also said they would vote for him again. Even so, many of them are not too far behind their Democratic peers on a number of social issues, according to polling analysis as well as interviews with these young voters.

Recent polling from Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape found that both Democrats and Republicans in this generation, ages 18-24, have favorable opinions of people who are LGBTQ (83 percent of young Democrats have a favorable view compared with 66 percent of young Republicans) and support legalizing marijuana (67 percent of young Democrats compared to 55 percent of young Republicans). The gap between Democratic and Republican Gen Zers is also fairly small when it comes to separating children from their parents at the border when their parents could be prosecuted for illegally entering the U.S., with just 7 percent of young Democrats and 26 percent of young Republicans agreeing with that policy.

The fact that young Republicans arent that different from their Democratic peers on some social issues is largely on par with what academic research and studies from Pew have found, though not all social issues were as cut-and-dried. For example, even though two-thirds of Gen Zers want stricter gun measures, according to Rasmussen Reports survey data, young Republicans are still far less likely than young Democrats to want to ban assault rifles, according to Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape. One of the Republican men I spoke with said gun rights had even become a barometer for how he judges political candidates. If you know somebodys opinion on gun rights, you can make a pretty educated guess as to where they stand on every other issue even unrelated ones, Stephan Kapustka, 22, told me.

Abortion may be another issue like this. Although the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape polling showed that a majority of Gen Zers from each party said they believe at least some abortions should be permitted and only 16 percent of young Democrats and 33 percent of young Republicans said abortions should never be permitted the issue divided the men I spoke with. For example, Price, who voted for Trump in both 2016 and 2020, is strongly anti-abortion. Regarding his childhood neighborhood outside of Newark, New Jersey, he told me, I could more easily find a Planned Parenthood than I could a park. Henke, who is Christian, agreed; during a separate phone call, he said he used to take a more hands-off stance toward abortion, but switched to an anti-abortion stance after talking with his pastor. Matthew C., meanwhile, told me hes pro-abortion rights. Overall, few Republicans want to outright ban abortion, but this is one social issue where young Republicans appear to be closer to the opinions of their elders in the party.

But the biggest gaps between Gen-Z Republicans and Democrats arent on social issues. Its how they view issues of economic and foreign policy. And for many young Republicans, thats whats driving their support of the GOP. For example, Gen-Z Democrats are way more likely than Gen-Z Republicans to support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour (79 percent for young Democrats compared with 43 percent for young Republicans), cutting taxes for families that make less than $100,000 a year (69 percent compared with 43 percent) and raising taxes for families that make over $600,000 a year (70 percent compared with 38 percent).

A lot of us are very financially motivated, and maybe thats because we grew up in the Great Recession, Henke told me. I was raised to be financially responsible because my parents started with pretty much nothing and now theyre both pretty successful. Theyve taught me and my family to be fiscally responsible, and thats the biggest thing that motivates me.

Indeed, even though the Democratic Party is closer in line with where some of these Gen-Z Republicans stand on social issues, it might be economic policy plus opposition to abortion and gun control that has a bigger hold on them. Some of Trumps more populist messaging around draining the swamp has also resonated with them.

[Trump] made me really proud to be an American and made me feel like the American Dream is alive and well, Luke T. said. He did a really good job of grabbing hold of peoples frustration with the establishment, and I liked that he was an outsider, rather than a traditional Republican.

But its not just the economy and Trump that has made these young voters loyal to the GOP. Kapustka told me hes open to more left-leaning views on social issues, but that hes had conversations with his fellow Republican friends who think that the Democrats dont really care about them because theyre evil, white males or something like that.

Data and interviews with Gen-Z Republicans illustrate a cap on young Republicans more socially liberal views, particularly as it pertains to recent political fights over cancel culture and how socially progressive or woke Americans should be. For instance, polling from Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape found that over half (55 percent) of Gen-Z Republicans believe we should end the practice of shaming people who say things that arent politically correct, versus 38 percent of Gen-Z Democrats who believe the same. This could be related to research that suggests Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say that they self-censor their political views due to fear of judgment for what they believe. Shutting people down or attacking them on Twitter seems to be a new thing, Matthew C. told me. And I think cancel culture is horrible. I grew up around social media and the internet, and they both can be very toxic.

Indeed, political science research suggests that young voters are shaped by what happens in their late adolescence and early adult years, so if there is a fear among younger Republicans that voicing their political views risks retribution, it could explain in part why recent GOP culture-war issues have played such a role in shaping these voters political consciousness.

To be sure, theres still a lot we dont know about Gen Z as a whole because they make up less than 10 percent of the electorate. Moreover, most of what we do know is limited to how they voted in the past one or two presidential races. But its possible that, over time, Gen-Z Republicans wont be a political minority. Theres already some evidence that todays younger liberals might get more conservative as they get older, and roughly one-third of Gen-Z voters who dont identify as Republican said that they would consider voting for a moderate Republican candidate, according to a June 2020 survey by the Niskanen Center. For now, though, young Republicans are just a small slice of the electorate, but as long as the party sticks to its roots or, its founding principles of small government and free enterprise its unlikely these voters are going anywhere anytime soon.

Meredith Conroy contributed research.

CORRECTION (Aug. 24, 2021, 6:09 p.m.): An earlier version of the first chart in this article said there was a +23.2 point gap between Republicans and Democrats ages 18-24 on whether they supported capping carbon emissions to combat climate change. The gap was actually +33.3 points.

Read more:
Why Some Socially Liberal Gen-Z Voters Arent Leaving The GOP - FiveThirtyEight