In recent years, the trend has been for people with higher educational qualifications to tend towards Labour. The polling organisations insist that this is the case even when adjusting for the fact that younger voters are more likely to have a degree than old voters. However, I haven't seen any detailed analysis to support this. If the pollsters are right, the Tories have a big problem.

But even if this is a real trend, it will be offset by the increasing demands of family/mortgage, which discourages support for radicalism. In simplistic terms, the more money you have, the less likely you are to want the government to 'steal' it from you.

I doubt it, fewer young people are getting married and there has been a steep decline in home ownership since 2001 due to obscenely high house prices. Demographics is going to punish the Conservatives quite a lot over the next decade (2020-2029) IMO.

it’s fascinating how this infighting over brexit dominates the tory’s...it’s simply what the younger demographic don’t want and being done by a party they hold nothing in common in the first place. it really puts the death knell in them as a governing party from 2020 onwards which makes me very happy.

it’s fascinating that there isn’t more awareness to this; when you fight for the rights of one depleting older group of society at the expense of anyone young, the tide is going to turn and people won’t forget...

Of course, the pattern of people voting more conservatively as they get older has been long established, but will this pattern be affected by the higher number of people going to university nowadays?

It'll be a decade or two before a majority (or at least a large minority) of the middle-aged will have been to university, but do you think this will affect the pattern of rightward swing with age?

Um yes. The tounger generations are FAR more liberal than the babyboomers. This means the Tories are gonna have a hard time, as will Brexiteers, as millenials have been inured to right wing propaganda against the EU/ have lived in the EU and loved it. Brexit will be reversed in a few years.

Who mentioned marriage? People will still pair up, want families, and need somewhere to live.

As for demographics - the redrawing of constituency boundaries to equalize electorates invariably helps the Tories. That's not partisan 'gerrymandering' - Tory seats tend to get bigger over time, and therefore have to be divided to reduce their electorates, and Labour ones shrink, necessitating them to be combined to increase their average electorates.
IMO as long as Corbyn is Labour leader, the Tory vote will stay firm enough to keep Labour out of office

the age at which a voter is more likely to have voted Conservative than Labour, is now 47 – up from 34 at the start of the campaign.

However amongst those with high level educational qualifications (defined as degree-level or above) Labour led by 17 percentage points.

Tuition fees was the first nail in the coffin. The very fact that we had an election called 'Revenge of the Youth', which the elite and right wing rags and BBTory could not BELIEVE, and hated of course, shows what is up for the Tories: desolation. Goodbye, Landed Gentry Toffs, may you never darken No.10 again.

With your constant use of phrases like 'Landed Gentry Toffs' I'm guessing you studied 'The History of Socialism' at uni?

I don't think either of you really know what socialism is.

You also completely failed to address the point on the way that the current trend away from home ownership, particularly among the under-40s, is going to affect Tory votes.

On the redrawing of boundaries point - yes, in theory that will work in the Tories' favour in the future. However, three points:

1. Their upsurge among the socially conservative working classes in 2017 (and decline in the socially liberal middle class vote) means that the difference in size of a Tory seat compared to a Labour one is now a lot smaller than it was before this election, so redrawing won't help them anywhere near as much as it did.
2. They won't be able to amend the boundaries during this parliament as they have no majority, and the DUP would massively lose out from the changes.
3. A future Labour government may well recognise that it's far more sensible to draw boundaries based on population, not electorate. That would probably wipe out the remaining Tory advantage.

I don't think either of you really know what socialism is.

You also completely failed to address the point on the way that the current trend away from home ownership, particularly among the under-40s, is going to affect Tory votes.

On the redrawing of boundaries point - yes, in theory that will work in the Tories' favour in the future. However, three points:

1. Their upsurge among the socially conservative working classes in 2017 (and decline in the socially liberal middle class vote) means that the difference in size of a Tory seat compared to a Labour one is now a lot smaller than it was before this election, so redrawing won't help them anywhere near as much as it did.
2. They won't be able to amend the boundaries during this parliament as they have no majority, and the DUP would massively lose out from the changes.
3. A future Labour government may well recognise that it's far more sensible to draw boundaries based on population, not electorate. That would probably wipe out the remaining Tory advantage.

They may be more liberal than the parents, but GE's are fought on far more issues than simply Brexit.

Who will organise a drive for a new referendum anyway - you surely cannot disagree that the major parties are both too divided to organise a 'de-brexiting' campaign on their own? It took a whole new party to generate enough impetus for Brexit, so I suspect nothing less would get us back in.

Then please tell us what you think it is.
But it's an *unwilling* move away from home ownership for the most part, that makes a difference

re 1. I have the full election results on a spreadsheet so I can check that out - but change in political representation doesn't solve unequal constituency size.

You might be right about the boundary changes, but it is a problem that just *won't* go away.

I just don't understand the third part - why on earth should seats be based on the whole population, when only the over-18's can vote?

We also need to tackle *why* there's a drift from urban to sub-urban/rural areas. It's a no-brainer really - better housing, schools, and facilities in general, plus much lower crime levels.

But it's an *unwilling* move away from home ownership for the most part, that makes a difference

re 1. I have the full election results on a spreadsheet so I can check that out - but change in political representation doesn't solve unequal constituency size.

You might be right about the boundary changes, but it is a problem that just *won't* go away.

I just don't understand the third part - why on earth should seats be based on the whole population, when only the over-18's can vote?

We also need to tackle *why* there's a drift from urban to sub-urban/rural areas. It's a no-brainer really - better housing, schools, and facilities in general, plus much lower crime levels.

With your constant use of phrases like 'Landed Gentry Toffs' I'm guessing you studied 'The History of Socialism' at uni?