Nuh-uh. Youth vote ain't worth beans all by itself. It is, however, an important component of a coalition that is holding together pretty well whenever it is tested not by pollsters but by actual elections.
You people here who are absolutely obsessed with the tragedy in Gaza and insert it into every conversation keep using an assumption of your own: that a certain group of voters (youth) will elevate their disapproval of a complex global event over their own self-interest. You assume they are naive enough to cut off their nose to spite their face, that the youth who actually vote - rather than the youth who post online - will withhold a vote from a candidate they agree with on values 85% of the time over the 15% of the time they don't. The idea that the average under-30/35 voter will find Middle East policy more important than income inequality, job growth, housing, education, climate change, healthcare, abortion access, gun control, and crimminal justice reform PUT TOGETHER... Well, I might be wrong, but that notion is incredible to me.
But, what do I know? I cast my first vote at 21 for Hillary in the primary, because - while she was a tad too neoliberal for me - I thought her takes were nuanced and Bernie was an absolute airhead. I supported Warren 4 years later, than Biden in the general, and will do so again as I have considered my expectations totally surpassed. Everyone is different but that is me.
P.S. You do get that Heather Cox Richardson commenters tend to be a pretty bookish bunch, and that hilariously obscure and obviously unreliable links are not going to lead us away from the dastardly mainstream media, right?
Expand on the “airheadedness of Bernie Sanders. No one is stronger than he is on income inequality. That was the first thing on your list of young voters concerns. How is he an airhead? That seems unfair to me.
Hi David. I know it has been several days, but if you are still interested in a reply...
To be clear, I *like* Bernie Sanders to a certain degree, and the word I chose was a colorful one that I wouldn't use in a less formal setting. As always, the usual "just my opinion" caveat applies. However, when you say that "No one is stronger than he is on income inequality," I disagree, and this disagreement best illuminates my perception. I do not think Sanders is the *strongest* on income inequality; I find him the *loudest* and *clearest* on income inequality, which (while appreciated) does not make one strong on a subject. To me, that would require a set of policy proposals that are immediately achievable and detailed enough to tackle the full scope of the issue holistically. As a voter, I found Bernie's proposals sorely lacking in these qualities. I remember going to his website to find more detail on his Medicare for All plan and discovering that there wasn't any plan of the sort beyond saying "we should have universal health care in this country!" I agree! However, if you are asking me to help you become the most powerful person on Earth, you better have receipts for a proposal that would rewrite a large section of the world's largest economy. Bernie himself seems above-board and many smart people I respect supported him, but his entire candidacy both times struck me as a cult of personality. My college friends liked how he never "sold out" but I saw someone with a very limited legislative record and a surfeit of righteousness. Plus, the idea that the majority of registered Democrats would balk at supporting someone who took it as a point of pride that he wasn't really part of the party should not have been surprising. If he and his supporters couldn't even have that level of self-awareness, I could not count myself among them.
You keep thinking the youth vote is going to save you. How quickly the political pundits who killed Bernie used to mock that trope.
https://mondoweiss.net/2024/01/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-94-israeli-forces-kill-four-year-old-girl-in-occupied-west-bank-gazas-children-face-brunt-of-the-genocide/
Nuh-uh. Youth vote ain't worth beans all by itself. It is, however, an important component of a coalition that is holding together pretty well whenever it is tested not by pollsters but by actual elections.
You people here who are absolutely obsessed with the tragedy in Gaza and insert it into every conversation keep using an assumption of your own: that a certain group of voters (youth) will elevate their disapproval of a complex global event over their own self-interest. You assume they are naive enough to cut off their nose to spite their face, that the youth who actually vote - rather than the youth who post online - will withhold a vote from a candidate they agree with on values 85% of the time over the 15% of the time they don't. The idea that the average under-30/35 voter will find Middle East policy more important than income inequality, job growth, housing, education, climate change, healthcare, abortion access, gun control, and crimminal justice reform PUT TOGETHER... Well, I might be wrong, but that notion is incredible to me.
But, what do I know? I cast my first vote at 21 for Hillary in the primary, because - while she was a tad too neoliberal for me - I thought her takes were nuanced and Bernie was an absolute airhead. I supported Warren 4 years later, than Biden in the general, and will do so again as I have considered my expectations totally surpassed. Everyone is different but that is me.
P.S. You do get that Heather Cox Richardson commenters tend to be a pretty bookish bunch, and that hilariously obscure and obviously unreliable links are not going to lead us away from the dastardly mainstream media, right?
Love your comments this am.....especially to the in-house troll.
Will, from Cal,
Expand on the “airheadedness of Bernie Sanders. No one is stronger than he is on income inequality. That was the first thing on your list of young voters concerns. How is he an airhead? That seems unfair to me.
Hi David. I know it has been several days, but if you are still interested in a reply...
To be clear, I *like* Bernie Sanders to a certain degree, and the word I chose was a colorful one that I wouldn't use in a less formal setting. As always, the usual "just my opinion" caveat applies. However, when you say that "No one is stronger than he is on income inequality," I disagree, and this disagreement best illuminates my perception. I do not think Sanders is the *strongest* on income inequality; I find him the *loudest* and *clearest* on income inequality, which (while appreciated) does not make one strong on a subject. To me, that would require a set of policy proposals that are immediately achievable and detailed enough to tackle the full scope of the issue holistically. As a voter, I found Bernie's proposals sorely lacking in these qualities. I remember going to his website to find more detail on his Medicare for All plan and discovering that there wasn't any plan of the sort beyond saying "we should have universal health care in this country!" I agree! However, if you are asking me to help you become the most powerful person on Earth, you better have receipts for a proposal that would rewrite a large section of the world's largest economy. Bernie himself seems above-board and many smart people I respect supported him, but his entire candidacy both times struck me as a cult of personality. My college friends liked how he never "sold out" but I saw someone with a very limited legislative record and a surfeit of righteousness. Plus, the idea that the majority of registered Democrats would balk at supporting someone who took it as a point of pride that he wasn't really part of the party should not have been surprising. If he and his supporters couldn't even have that level of self-awareness, I could not count myself among them.