231
Showing Contempt for Young Voters Is a Great Way for Democrats to Lose in November (www.thenation.com)
submitted 4 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 49 points 4 months ago

Who will replace the young people that Clinton regards as dunces? In 2016, the pitch was made to suburban Republicans of the Never Trump persuasion. In 2024, this has been recast as the Biden campaign’s attempts to appeal to Nikki Haley Republicans. This strategy only makes sense as a response to Biden’s loss of support among young people and nonwhite voters.

Clintonian triangulation failed in 2016, and it will fail again in 2024. You simply can’t win as a Democratic presidential candidate by giving the back of your hand to large parts of your own coalition. Joe Biden understood that in 2020—but tragically seems to be suffering from memory loss in 2024.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 53 points 4 months ago

That's just a spot on analysis.

There are no Republicans that will vote for Joe Biden.

There are voters who will vote Joe Biden if he moves to go get them.

This isn't complicated.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 49 points 4 months ago

It’s just flabbergasting because Obama had an incredibly strong showing in 08 largely because of the youth vote… and nobody at the DNC is willing to admit that, because the youth vote is far too progressive these days.

That’s a shot at the DNC, not the 18-25 demographic.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

We should start our own party!

[-] bazus1@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Checks out. Would be a party.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Defederate from the government.

[-] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

Only one party has added sex work as part of their platform.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This has been a constant issue with Democrats. For some reason they want to cater to right leaning (white) America instead of courting groups that legit win them elections in the first place (young, Latino, and black).

It's how Obama and Biden won in the first place

[-] fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago

I assume because the youth aren't lining their pockets

[-] ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip 13 points 4 months ago

There were enough Republicans who voted for Biden in '20 to flip Georgia, which is solidly "mainstream" Republican (e.g. Reagan Republicans).

The article's analysis of why Hillary lost is correct, and the diagnosis of the failures of Clintonism is also correct. They fail to point out that Clinton "won" '92 because Perot pulled away enough Bush votes in enough states to swing the Electoral College to Clinton, who only got 40% of the popular vote. That "victory" somehow convinced a bunch of Democrats that conservatism without bigotry (or at least less) was the key to electoral success. Clinton got reelected with the power of incumbency and BobDole being a fairly weak candidate. That cemented the conservatism lite in the Democratic Party for a generation, many of whom are still in the party.

It's changing though. Biden is not a classic conservative Democrat anymore, or at least his team and policies aren't.

One big thing they need to do is acknowledge that the system is rigged against the non wealthy, and that small-d democracy as it exists today in America is not up to the task of helping the non wealthy. Then they need to propose ways to fix our broken democracy, ask young people for suggestions for how to fix it, and write some binding policy proposals to implement those fixes.

Because right now Trump and the Republicans are acknowledging that our democracy is failing non wealthy (straight white Christian) people, and the solution they're offering is to do away with it entirely in favor of Hungarian or Russian style authoritarianism.

The first part of that message will resonate, and the "help us fix democracy" part needs to be the 2nd half. Or Trump probably will get reelected.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I think what you meant to say was, that demographics of typically non-voting, but potentially Democrat voters, were activated in 2020, to flip GA.

No Republicans flipped to make GA go blue. It was massive turn out from black and youth voters.

The idea that Republicans do 'flip' or will ever 'flip' is a damaging fiction.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/georgia-demographic-shift-vote-democrat-republican-1.5794314

[-] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 months ago

I broadly agree with your comment and wanted to add this since it’s a common misconception: Georgia is a purple state with a suppressed vote, not a red state. In addition to gerrymandering and frequent voter roll purges, people in urban areas commonly wait hours in line to vote in fewer polling stations than existed in previous years. And that’s not even taking into account things like criminalizing handing out water to people waiting to vote in line.

There are probably worse states to try to vote, but I wouldn’t think there are that many.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

There are probably worse states to try to vote, but I wouldn’t think there are that many.

i don't know how many but i do know that texas and arizona by living and trying to vote in them; i also florida is another and that's 2 out of the 4 biggest electoral college states.

[-] NoSuchAgency@lemdro.id -5 points 4 months ago

and the solution they're offering is to do away with it entirely in favor of Hungarian or Russian style authoritarianism.

Where do you get this from?

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

He's just making it up. Republicans going to Biden didn't flip GA. An activated youth and black vote flipped GA.

[-] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Reaching for the republican defectors instead of reaching for the disenfranchised progressives that are unfortunately stuck in your party already. They may just be too busy working to try to survive in this economy than to show up to vote for someone who forgot about them anyway. Dems would rather scoot to the right than get pulled to the left. Hell, they would rather have a Trump presidency than move to the left. Progressives hurt their doners, a Trump presidency gives them tax breaks and lowers the bar for the office so they can run an even shittier candidate in 2028 as we spiral into this corporate idiocracy.

Anyway, I will be voting for Biden in November to keep it as far left as possible. But it is not a great strategy. I am getting more and more apathetic with this bullshit game and might keep my nose out of federal elections and stick to local/state elections in the future until someone comes along to shake things up. The last 8 years have been horrible in this country and embarrassing, and the best they can do is give US THE SAME SHIT OVER AND OVER. The federal level elections are just a money funneling clown show that gets gerrymandered into alignment in their desires anyway.

To clarify, I haven't seen Biden actively disregard us as a species, I've seen him pretend to placate us with things like a half assed "attempt" at student loan forgiveness thinking we are dumb enough to be like. "Well, he tried, guess Republicans are bad." At the end of the day he has actually done nothing productive during his first term, the term he is supposed to be worried about reelection. Even less is somehow going to happen in his second term. But at least he's not actively going backward like Trump would do.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

To clarify, I haven’t seen Biden actively disregard us as a species, I’ve seen him pretend to placate us with things like a half assed “attempt” at student loan forgiveness thinking we are dumb enough to be like. “Well, he tried, guess Republicans are bad.” At the end of the day he has actually done nothing productive during his first term, the term he is supposed to be worried about reelection. Even less is somehow going to happen in his second term. But at least he’s not actively going backward like Trump would do.

he disregarded you if you took any private student loans after 2005

biden was instrumental in making student loan debt easy & non-dischargeable; he deserves more of the blame for it than anybody else for the crap this country is about to experience from this $1.4 trillion fuck up.

also: if you're not straight he voted against gay marriage and gays in the military and also advocated against gays in federal service.

also: if you think integration was a good thing, biden disagreed.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 34 points 4 months ago

I agree with the article except for this part:

Joe Biden’s success in 2020 was due in no small part to his deliberate rejection of Clinton’s failed strategy. “Scranton Joe” courted both Sanders voters and blue-collar whites. He promised expanded infrastructure spending and tougher trade deals. Progressive young people might not have given Biden their votes in the primaries, but he campaigned as a candidate who saw them as part of his coalition and duly won their votes on Election Day.

I think the main reason Biden won in 2020 is because of COVID. That and correctly recognizing that people despise both him and Trump and realizing that if he simply stays out of the limelight people won't pay as much attention to how bad he is. Neither of these factors are working for him now, it's much harder to stay out of the limelight when you're the one in charge.

I suppose there may have been less open hostility towards the left compared to Clinton, but only because that's such a low bar.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

I also believe COVID played a huge role. People were like "Trump is an idiot and is going to get us all killed!" so they went with Biden. Then Biden did ok for awhile then some of us had to die for the economy. :(

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee -4 points 4 months ago

And everyone is bitching about the state of the economy now. You think it would have been better off if we had extended even longer the conditions that led to the inflation?

[-] Yggnar@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

The inflation we have experienced since 2020 is almost exclusively due to corporate greed.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago

Do you have any numbers to back this up?

Because economist disagree.

[-] triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 4 months ago

  1. yes that's exactly the evidence from the 1918 flu pandemic showed: places which locked down harder and longer had quicker economic recovery. This is probably even more the case with COVID which is leaving people longterm, if not lifetime, disabled.

  2. the documented reason for recent inflation in the US is corporate greed, the only thing COVID did was give corporate execs an excuse

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)
  1. Can I get a citation on this? I searched and found nothing. But also the comparison is hard because the COIVD-19 lockdowns were much more severe. Like we had a complete shut down, most of the spanish flu there were few actually "lockdowns" as most businesses were allowed to stay open, it was more schools and public institutions were closed. They even still held parades and public celebrations. Additionally they were shorter in length. If "length of lockdown" is a good indication of how strong you come out economically on the other side of a pandemic, then we should have been way better off. Additionally, the economy has rebounded very weel, it has just come at the cost of inflation.
  2. This is untrue. Plenty of inflation was due to disruptions and monetary policy during the pandemic. It was almost a deliberate choice by the fed to pump money into the economy, to keep people employed, at the cost of inflation, as they figured that was better than a huge economic downturn, or even another depression. Sure, some of it now is corporate greed, as they realized they could raise prices and people would still pay, but it's by and large due to policies during the pandemic.
[-] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 29 points 4 months ago

Put aside all current issues and just look at the fundamentals. Obama was a charismatic politician and organizer who inspired youth vote and a way-above-average black turnout. Makes sense. Biden by contrast lacks rizz in any appreciable amount. He isn't going to move the needle for young people or any particular groups. He has no built-in support.

It is really as simple as that.

[-] Shanedino@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Idk, dark Brandon was kinda hype for me.

[-] WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 20 points 4 months ago

Cynically I presume that the Dems keep trying to court moderate Republicans because if they can get enough support from them, they can justify sticking with a moderate platform that allows the DNC to continue collecting enormous piles of soft money from corporations.

In order to appeal to the more progressive younger voters (and make no mistake about it - appealing to them would GUARANTEE victory), they would have to adopt a platform that would cut into thise enormous piles of soft money.

And they're just not willing to do that. The simple fact of the matter is that the DNC values the money more than it values actually winning the election. If guaranteeing the ininterrupted flow of soft money requires tactics that mean the Democrat loses, then that, to them, is just the way it goes.

And after the fact, they'll just blame someone else - almost certainly the progressives.

[-] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Democrats stab you in the back, Republicans stab you right in the fucking face. But they are both stabbing you...

[-] WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 9 points 4 months ago

Pretty much, yeah.

The Republicans are able to overtly promise to do things the corporate jackals want, and just spin it a bit so the voters will think it's for them. They can promise to cut taxes (and not mention that that's just taxes for the rich) or promise to downsize government (and not mention that they're just going to eliminate regulations to which corporations and rich people don't want to be subject), and so on.

The Democrats are in a much trickier position, since there's no way to spin their intention of working for the benefit of the corporate jackals as representing the will of their supporters, and they can't sincerely promise to do the things their supporters expect without alienating the jackals and cutting into the flow of that sweet, sweet soft money. So they're stuck either making vague, wishy-washy promises that they then don't keep, or just being overtly moderate-at-best and trying to shame leftists into supporting them anyway.

[-] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The last one is the current situation. I just hope that maybe with the death of the Boomers and Trump turning the RNC into a circus that is very much a minority with younger people that the republican party as we know it is not long for this world. Maybe the current democrats move into that spot, and someone a little further left will emerge. I feel like current politics has gone too far to the right. Hopefully there is some symbolance of functionality and things right itself. But, I am silly if I think that happens in my lifetime.

[-] WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 3 points 4 months ago

I just hope that maybe with the death of the Boomers and Trump turning the RNC into a circus that is very much a minority with younger people that the republican party as we know it is not long for this world. Maybe the current democrats move into that spot, and someone a little further left will emerge.

If ours was a reasonably healthy system, I think that's exactly what would happen. And it wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened.

The problem though is that the Republicans - or more precisely their think tank advisers - recognize that that's the way things are headed, and the party is determined to stop it by any means possible, which basically boils down to undermining education and access to information to keep as much of the public as ignorant and misinformed as possible, and to destroy democratic institutions, discourage voting, gerrymander and expand the police state in order to counter those who will stubbornly end up opposing them anyway.

Broadly, there are three possible paths a party that's gotten to the point that it no longer represents the will of enough people to be a contender can follow. It can reform itself, it can allow itself to be eliminated and replaced, or it can arrange things so that people are conned or forced into supporting it anyway, in spite of the fact that it's really in almost nobody's interests to do that. And the Republicans have very obviously chosen the third path.

And our system is so broken that they might just succeed.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

or just being overtly moderate-at-best and trying to shame leftists into supporting them anyway.

i never understood this logic; what do they expect will happen with shaming? that the shame will get you to relinquish your beliefs somehow like it does with religious people?

[-] WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 3 points 4 months ago

I think that for many of them, it's actually sincere. It's not a cynical strategy to continue failing to actually represent their constituency and get elected anyway - they actually believe that those on the left who oppose them should be ashamed of doing so.

As a general rule, people aren't consciously evil and destructive. Some certainly are, but many (most?) live in a sort of fantasy world in which they've framed their evil such that it's at least justified if not actually good. They rationalize and excuse all of the concessions they make and build up this whole framework in which what they're doing is right.

And then when they look out at other people from within that (warped) framework, it really does appear to them that those who have not chosen to do as they do are wrong for having done so, and thus justifiably shamed.

And they never stop and pull back and try to analyze things from another perspective, since to do so would risk destroying this whole fantasy world they've built - all of their rationalizations and excuses and comforting misconceptions would come crashing down. And they can't allow that. So they just cling to the fantasy, which means, among other things, charging ahead with the (mis)perception that their critics are shamefully wrong.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I thought you were banned?

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Temp 30 day ban from the main politics channel

this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
231 points (86.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7178 readers
486 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
pangyuehung@lemmy.ml
yogthos@lemmy.ml