Why Democrats Have a Problem with Young Voters

[Luminous Animal]

Ten youths that I know who volunteered and campaigned for Obama and worked their butts off are now convinced that they are going to sit this one out. Endless global war and no jobs are their main complaints. Most of them consider themselves Occupiers or regularly participate in Occupy actions.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/why-democrats-have-a-problem-with-young-voters-20120228?print=true




Why Democrats Have a Problem with Young Voters
RS Politics Daily
by: Rick Perlstein

Then came Barack Obama, and Cecil fell in love. "The war thing was big," he remembers. "I had a friend who went to Iraq and died. Obama’s whole opposition to the war was very important to me." He packed up his car and drove all the way across the country to become an Obama organizer in New Hampshire, then Maine, then Vermont. Because he was good at it, he was named deputy field director in Oregon, then one of two deputies in a crucial Midwestern state. After the election, in Washington, he was one of the principles in setting up a major new national progressive activist group.

...

You could call Cecil a progressive. Just don't call him a Democrat. As intense as his alienation from the Republican Party is his disinclination to state any party identity at all. He says, "I feel more attached to a politics of hope and optimism than I do to the Democratic Party"

...

The turn away from party identification has been a long-term American trend: According to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans don't consider themselves members of a political party, compared to 36 percent in 2002 and 33 percent in 1988. But that trend has been all the more accelerated among young people — and even more so among young progressives. A study by Tufts University's Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement in the key swing state of Nevada found that youth were 11 percent of registered voters in the 2008 election, but just 7.85 percent in October of 2011 – meaning a key Obama constituency in 2008 will have thinned out for 2012. More menacingly for Dems, those same researchers found that in North Carolina, a Southern state where in 2008 Obama scored an apparently historic map-changing victory, Democratic registration among 18-25 year olds was 300,000 in 2008 – and only 265,000 in 2011. Republican registration among the same age cohort is about the same. Nationally, Republican youth registration has gone up—which means that the Republican Party is bucking the trend: right-of-center kids seem perfectly happy calling themselves Republicans, at the same time that young lefties are becoming increasingly chary of being called Democrats.

....


The people running the Democratic Party itself laid down their bet on that question long ago: Take 'em for granted. It makes more sense, a generation of Democratic strategists agree, to plug for "independent" voters in the middle, even at the expense of strong stands for traditionally Democratic constituencies. Jimmy Carter started the trend, deliberately shutting out unions from decision-making in his administration, canceling spending projects on infrastructure, and explaining in his 1978 State of the Union, "Government cannot eliminate poverty or provide a bountiful economy or reduce inflation or save our cities or cure illiteracy or provide energy." Clinton, of course, said the same thing — "the age of big government is over" — then made "triangulation" -- explicitly positioning himself as an adversary of Democrats in Congress -- the core of his reelection strategy. Barack Obama, as we know, has made such post-partisan gestures the soul of his political identity.

[JoePhilly]

1. They sound stupid ... like Nader supporters.

Sit home ... and let an insane right wing nut become President ... great plan.

[white_wolf]

2. Really?

I think they sound smart enough to realize some that a lot of people haven't. Both parties are servants of the rich. These young adults took a chance on Obama in 08 and he failed to deliver. Blame him.

[libinnyandia]

6. It's easy to blame Obama. This system is so dysfunctional when indivdual Senators can prevent

the Senabte from doing its job. If young peeople st t out in 2012 and the Republicans run the show what will very likely happen will destroy the lives so many young people. If, after hearing all the crazy things the GOP is saying, they aren't motivated to get involved in the process, then they will have only themselves to blame.

[bayareamike]

7. Failed to deliver?

Sure, he has done some things that liberals may not like -- hell, I'm included in that category -- but he HAS accomplished a lot. Progress is incremental. That's the name of the game in the US.

Two more points

1. The two parties are NOT equal in terms of their actions. I'm sick and tired of this idea that they both equally suck. Democrats may not be perfect, but there are significant differences in policy between the two parties.

2. As it was asked earlier, why would one sit out and potentially let one of the insane, far right GOP candidates win? That has got to be the most self-defeating strategy ever.

[white_wolf]

10. Both parties are in the pockets of the rich. They just serve in different ways.

That is why a lot of people are frustrated with the democrats and aren't voting. They don't see the democrats fighting for them, they see the democrats going along with the republicans in the name of pragmatism and bi-partisanship.

[B Calm]

27. Republicans don't want you to vote.

The young people are falling for an old republican trick.

The only way we can get change, is to vote.

The democratic party is only as strong as the people who vote for them. We the people have to encourage our politicans do what we want. Sitting out an election is NOT the answer!

[Luminous Animal]

31. My phrasing was clumsy. Most are likely to vote... none will volunteer.

They won't wear buttons, they won't put signs on their windows, they won't register voters, they won't work on get out the vote campaigns, they won't go to strategizing house parties, they won't make phone calls... etc., etc., etc.

And none would agree that the ONLY way to get change is to vote.

[treestar]

34. What kind of person expects a President to "deliver" things to them?

They just sound like self centered assholes.

[white_wolf]

35. Oh please it is a common figure of speech.

I clearly meant that Obama has not delivered on his promises. Seriously, grow up and stop with the stupid semantic arguments.

[treestar]

85. He has delivered on him promises

On most of them, to the extent practicable. Grow up and realize that Congress and the Courts have power and that any candidate's promises are by definition limited by the power of the office in question.

[white_wolf]

86. How about the Patriot Act?

He could have vetoed the extension, but choose to keep that unconstitutional PoS in place.

[loyalsister]

79. You make a good point

I think that many people whose first experience with politics was 2008 presidential campaign expected the president to be all powerful. They hadn't followed or learned enough about government to relate the presidency to the legislative process, etc.
I also think the expectations were that Obama as president would instantly make their everyday lives better regardless of any outside forces. It's a drawback to Obama's ability to relate to people.

[bvar22]

84. I expect politicians to "deliver" on their campaign promises,

...or at least to make the effort to appear that they remember those promises.

"EFCA will be the law of the land"

"I will renegotiate NAFTA"

"put on comfortable shoes"

"including a Public Option"

"Americans have a RIGHT to know what is in their food. Country of Origin & GMO Labeling will be a priority"

"The only adjustment to Social Security will be Raising the Cap on the Payroll Tax"

I could go on and on,
and post the videos, but you get the point.
I DO expect politicians to at least TRY to "Deliver" on their campaign promises.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Luminous Animal]

3. Yes, calling these college educated youths (2 go to Columbia, 2 are at UCBerkeley, 1 graduated from

Stanford and is now going on to post-graduate work, 1 is at UC Santa Cruz and another at UCLA) stupid is going to convince them to get involved again in partisan electoral politics.

From their point of view, Obama and the Democratic Party haven't done much to stem the insanity.

[woo me with science]

4. Yep, this is exactly the attitude people feel from this Party now.

Really, both parties.

Utter contempt. And that is exactly the problem.

Occupy.

[myrna minx]

11. Genius GOTV strategy.

"You sound stupid - vote Obama."

[LanternWaste]

74. I imagine we often subscribe stupidity to people

I imagine we often subscribe stupidity to people who believe differently than we do.

[randome]

78. They're not registering as Democrats.

Hopefully that's not the same as 'sitting home'. My fingers are crossed.

[JNelson6563]

5. The complete opposite of my corner of the world.

Local Dems working closely with local Occupy. We attend and speak at each others' events, work on legislation together (it was a young, bright Occupy person working directly with Stabenow's staff on a farm bill) and protest, together! Many Occupy folks have signed up to volunteer with the Dems this election season.

I'd love to see some of these really bright & passionate young people continue their quest to make the world better. I'm convinced some of them will end up running for office.

It's been an invigorating partnership of shared goals and efforts and I love it! It appears to be a wildly popular union here in these parts.

Julie

[Luminous Animal]

16. That's cool. Which Occupy would that be? I'd like to follow their twitter feed and Face Book page.

[The Straight Story]

26. Could be one of these

http://occupywallst.org/

http://occupystreams.org/

Chat room full of people here:
http://occupywallst.org/chat/

[Luminous Animal]

29. I was asking for links to the specific Occupy group she was talking about. I'm following 75 or more

from around the globe. Today I added Occupy Paris.

Many Occupy groups have their own websites. Most, if not all, have their own twitter feed and facebook page.

[JNelson6563]

69. What a great idea!

75+? That's awesome.

Julie

[JNelson6563]

68. Thank you for asking!

I'm so proud of our group here, I don't know why I didn't think to post it! Check it out! Great bunch of people.

http://www.occupytraversecity.org/

Julie

[Le Taz Hot]

70. And in my neck of the woods,

the local Democrats can't run away from the Occupiers fast enough.

[JNelson6563]

73. Sounds like your local Dem party

is due for some fresh leadership.

Julie

[Le Taz Hot]

75. Well, thanks to modern medicine,

walkers and portable oxygen tanks, that's not likely to happen for a while.

[JNelson6563]

76. I know the story, it's frustrating!

We've got a few count parties like that in MI. Some have gone around them and started clubs instead and they make shit happen!

You have my sympathies!

Julie

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. Fuck 'em! Nader & Ron Paul ain't happening....EVER!

No matter how many hipsters write ridiculous articles to the contrary, this doesn't describe all young people, especially in the real world. The smart ones know what their choices are. The ones who can live on Mommy & Daddy's credit cards can afford to be idelogical no matter how much it hurts the folks they claim to be "standing up" for.

This sounds like a collection of fictional characters, or spoiled brats who are severely divorced from reality, Paulites & Naderites, the true believers.

It is my sincere wish that the Democratic Party doesn't do anything extraordinary to woo these assclowns. Sit it out! We've seen the previews of radical right shifts these past two years. The shit in the article sounds like something Breitbart & O'Keefe may have collaborated on before his untimely demise. This is just more planted psych-ops bullshit, to give Nader & Paul credibility, and siphon votes to the GOP. Good luck with that.

[Luminous Animal]

13. Rick Perlstein is in his mid-forties and is a commtited Democrat.

As he writes in the article,

My politics of optimism and hope still casts its lot with the Democrats — in the optimistic hope that the dying embers of its status as the party of our better angels, one that took risks for social justice, can still be fanned into a flame. But I'm an old man, born in 1969. I can't really blame someone born in 1991 for not buying the idea that the Democrats were once a party that often took political risks for social justice and can be again. Why should they believe me? They've never seen it in their lifetimes.

And the kids that I mentioned above? Many live in marginal housing that you wouldn't put your dog in.

[ProSense]

9. First of

all, there are no polls showing Republicans with an advantage among youth voters.

Yet the article seems to imply that Democrats are moving away from party identification while Republicans are signing up youth. If they're shaking party identity, but still supporting Democrats that does no good for Republicans.

Then came Barack Obama, and Cecil fell in love. "The war thing was big," he remembers. "I had a friend who went to Iraq and died. Obama’s whole opposition to the war was very important to me." He packed up his car and drove all the way across the country to become an Obama organizer in New Hampshire, then Maine, then Vermont. Because he was good at it, he was named deputy field director in Oregon, then one of two deputies in a crucial Midwestern state. After the election, in Washington, he was one of the principles in setting up a major new national progressive activist group.

By just about any metric you can think of, Cecil is on the left. (He requested I not use his real name because his employer is keen on preserving a non-ideological reputation.) The Republican Party's positions on gay rights and its anti-immigrant tilt, as long as they persist, "will keep me from voting for any Republican candidate," he says. "Anything bigotry-based and hate-based is going to lose me." He speaks with distaste of the Republican Party's "whole war-hawk thing." And he adds that, 99 times out of 100, "I'm going to vote Democratic."

You could call Cecil a progressive. Just don't call him a Democrat. As intense as his alienation from the Republican Party is his disinclination to state any party identity at all. He says, "I feel more attached to a politics of hope and optimism than I do to the Democratic Party"

He's not alone. It's more and more the case that young people who identify with Democrats on the issues shy from labeling themselves Democrats. In 2008, members of the "Millennial" generation — demographers' term for kids born between 1981 and 1993 — identified as Democrats rather than Republicans by 60 to 32 percent. Now, those figures are 47 and 43 percent.

The turn away from party identification has been a long-term American trend: According to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans don't consider themselves members of a political party, compared to 36 percent in 2002 and 33 percent in 1988. But that trend has been all the more accelerated among young people — and even more so among young progressives. A study by Tufts University's Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement in the key swing state of Nevada found that youth were 11 percent of registered voters in the 2008 election, but just 7.85 percent in October of 2011 – meaning a key Obama constituency in 2008 will have thinned out for 2012. More menacingly for Dems, those same researchers found that in North Carolina, a Southern state where in 2008 Obama scored an apparently historic map-changing victory, Democratic registration among 18-25 year olds was 300,000 in 2008 – and only 265,000 in 2011. Republican registration among the same age cohort is about the same. Nationally, Republican youth registration has gone up—which means that the Republican Party is bucking the trend: right-of-center kids seem perfectly happy calling themselves Republicans, at the same time that young lefties are becoming increasingly chary of being called Democrats.

The article jumps to a lot of conclusions. It cites some numbers, but give no solid numbers for Republicans. Again, unless someone can cite an increase in Republican support among young people, this article is a stretch.

[girl gone mad]

15. The article doesn't imply "that Democrats are moving away from party identification..

while Republicans are signing up youth"

It explicitly states as much. Read your excerpt a bit closer:

He's not alone. It's more and more the case that young people who identify with Democrats on the issues shy from labeling themselves Democrats. In 2008, members of the "Millennial" generation — demographers' term for kids born between 1981 and 1993 — identified as Democrats rather than Republicans by 60 to 32 percent. Now, those figures are 47 and 43 percent.

That's a fairly remarkable statistic, and it's an absolute embarrassment that Democrats, given all of our natural advantages with youth, have apparently lost a sizable portion of this generation over the last 4 years. What happened? Republicans have no economic plan to speak of and an embarrassingly unappealing platform. Why should we have lost any advantage to them?

[ProSense]

17. That's

The article doesn't imply "that Democrats are moving away from party identification..

while Republicans are signing up youth"

It explicitly states as much. Read your excerpt a bit closer:


He's not alone. It's more and more the case that young people who identify with Democrats on the issues shy from labeling themselves Democrats. In 2008, members of the "Millennial" generation — demographers' term for kids born between 1981 and 1993 — identified as Democrats rather than Republicans by 60 to 32 percent. Now, those figures are 47 and 43 percent.


That's a fairly remarkable statistic, and it's an absolute embarrassment that Democrats, given all of our natural advantages with youth, have apparently lost a sizable portion of this generation over the last 4 years. What happened? Republicans have no economic plan to speak of and an embarrassingly unappealing platform. Why should we have lost any advantage to them?

...a statistic without a source. It also doesn't say anything about the implication that Republicans are enjoying more success with youth.

The issue is semantic. I mean, here's the subject of the article:

"Anything bigotry-based and hate-based is going to lose me." He speaks with distaste of the Republican Party's "whole war-hawk thing." And he adds that, 99 times out of 100, "I'm going to vote Democratic."

I'll worry when Republicans start actually picking off the youth vote.

[Luminous Animal]

30. Source from Pew...

http://www.people-press.org/2011/11/03/the-generation-gap-and-the-2012-election-3/11-3-11-5/

[ProSense]

32. That

poll is from November 2011.

Still: http://www.people-press.org/2011/11/03/the-generation-gap-and-the-2012-election-3/11-3-11-1/

[Luminous Animal]

33. Y

ours refers to voting. Mine refers to party affiliation. Which is what the article addresses.

[ProSense]

37. As

"Yours refers to voting. Mine refers to party affiliation. Which is what the article addresses."

...long as they're voting Democratic! Obama by 26 points, and likely climbing.

[Luminous Animal]

18. It is amazing how little political savvy is being expressed here. It is a remarkable statistic

but rather than address it and strategize on methods to turn it around the response becomes of Greek chorus of Nader Nader Nader Paul Paul Paul Pony Pony Pony.

[Luminous Animal]

14. Let's hope that those right wing Republicans will cough up cash for Obama like they did for Kerry...

Who's Really in Bed with Republican Funders?
Republican Contributions: $10.7 Million for Kerry vs. $111,700 for Nader

Today, the Independent presidential campaign of Ralph Nader and Peter Miguel Camejo released the preliminary findings of research conducted by the Center for Responsive Politics. The findings demonstrate that Senator John Kerry has thousands of contributors who have supported the Republican Party. Kerry has more than ten million dollars donated by Republican donors.

...


The logical question ­ never asked by any journalist, so the Nader campaign had to, is how many Republican Fat Cats gave how much to Kerry and the Democrats was never asked of the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) by any journalist. So the Nader campaign asked the question the Kerry campaign never wanted asked: Is Kerry in bed with large contributors from the customary hedge their bets Republican campers- how many of them and for how much? If elected, will Kerry give them the access they want due to their donations?

Preliminary CRP results: 50,000 contributions who have given to President Bush or the Republicans have given $10,697,198 in large contributions to Kerry. This means 100 times more Republican money has been contributed to the Democrats campaign than to the Nader-Camejo campaign. That amount is five times the entire budget of the Nader Presidential campaign!

http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/10/19/republican-contributions-10-7-million-for-kerry-vs-111-700-for-nader/

[AnOhioan]

20. +1

[Warren DeMontague]

40. The difference is, the purpose of the Kerry $ was to put a Democrat in the White House.

The purpose of the Nader money was to put a Republican in the White House.

Here, we want to put a Democrat in the White House. If that bugs you, you're at the wrong website.

[SidDithers]

44. +1...

especially that last bit.

Sid

[Luminous Animal]

52. If you are going to present unsubstantiated assertions as proof...

perhaps you're at the wrong website. Tempting as it might be but unlike the Bush admin, we don't make our own reality.

[Warren DeMontague]

56. What unsubstantiated assertions?

These?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/07/09/MNGQQ7J31K1.DTL&ao=all

[Luminous Animal]

61. Nijad Fares donated to $2000 to Obama in 2004 (Senate campaign).

$2300 to Nader.

Nijad Fares also donated to Hillary Clinton in 2008 as well as the RNC.

I guess by donating to Obama, he was really trying to elect a republican. Only one donor on that list appears to be committed to electing Republicans (and even he donated to a couple of Democrats). Another person on that list seems to be committed to Lebanese and Arab issues political committees and has donated to Ds and Rs. Nader's familial heritage is Lebanese.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Again, don't be facile.

If this crappo isn't about promoting 3rd parties and skirting (la la la!) the rules around stumping against our presidential nominee, fine.

But let's not try to play goofy games- the RIGHT WING REPUBLICANS who bankrolled Nader's 2004 campaign did it so that the DEMOCRAT WOULD LOSE AND THE REPUBLICAN WOULD WIN.

And Nader supporters, with their heads firmly ensconced in their asses, thought that was just fucking peachy.

[Luminous Animal]

66. Right wing Republicans $110,000 to Nader. $10,000,000 to Kerry. Piss poor attempt

to swing the election to Republicans. 4% of Nader's donations came from Republicans. I guess that is what we call bankrolling these days.

Gosh. You'd think that if right wing Republicans were really really really trying to swing the election, they'd reverse those numbers.

Of course this is the Republican party that spent millions to "cage" African American voters to swing an election. But let's ignore that and focus on the $110,000 donated to Nader.

[Warren DeMontague]

82. I agree that everyone who involved with Nader's campaigns was wasting their time

That's for sure. Thank you for acknowledging how completely irrelevant the man is; he should have stuck to auto safety.

[Tarheel_Dem]

72. "If that bugs you, you're at the wrong website"

[bluestate10]

22. Yep. Bad story repeating itself. nt

[Luminous Animal]

24. So, you agree that John Kerry should have returned the $10 million he received from Republican

donors.

[Luminous Animal]

45. So you agree that John Kerry who accepted donations that were 5 times Nader's entire

budget is a corporatist Republican phony.

John Kerry $10 million dollars from Republicans. Nader $11 hundred thousand.

Why didn't Democrats demand that Kerry return those donations?

Will you demand that Obama return Republican donations?

[Luminous Animal]

55. See post numbe-r-r-r-r-r feeefty-tooooooooo!

Also, nearly half of Nader's Republican donors also donated to Kerry!

Don't be so disingenuous.

[Luminous Animal]

59. With a stick!

[Aerows]

83. IOKIYAR

To subvert. Most of us get it, because we have a clue. It's sad, really.

[Fumesucker]

58. IOKIYAD

QED

[BumRushDaShow]

19. GOP reliance on ‘culture wars’ turning off younger voters

Participation by young people in Republican primary races is down compared to four years ago and pollsters are seeing signs that the culture wars could weaken support for Republicans among younger voters.

“Millennials (18- to 29-year-olds) are a very tolerant generation. They have very much of a live and let live philosophy and when you suggest that government ought to come in and determine how you live, you lose millennials,” said Morley Winograd, a University of Southern California professor and author of “Millennial Momentum: How a Generation is Remaking America.”

A Reuters/Ipsos poll this month showed Obama’s approval rating at 53 percent among 18-34 year olds, compared to 48 percent for the overall population. Obama was ahead of Romney, then the Republican front-runner, by 51 percent to 37 percent among the young.

REPUBLICANS SQUANDERING CHANCE

“Who cares the most about contraception in America? Surprise, surprise, it’s people under 30. … They don’t have a clue why people make an issue over gay marriage. It’s something they grew up with,” said Geoffrey Garin, a Democratic strategist and pollster who has surveyed youth attitudes for MTV.

More: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/24/gop-reliance-on-culture-wars-turning-off-younger-voters/

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Glad to hear that the youth going to have their votes taken for granted and think for themselves.

"Young wolves, show us your teeth." John Steinbeck

[bluestate10]

23. Potentially getting a republican elected President is fucking stupid.

Being taken for granted has nothing to do with it. Do they stand for anything at all? I say not.

[Luminous Animal]

25. Oh, they are standing up for plenty of things, alright.

For prisoners rights; for dock workers and teachers; for equal justice; for peace; for a more equitable society; for pure food; for people who are being evicted; for food, clothing, healthcare, and shelter as a right.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. It sounds like they stand for the right not to buy into the establishment.

And, the corruption of the 2 party system that limits their "choices" Bad or Not as Bad.

[TheKentuckian]

64. Projection??? It would appear the problem is standing for things.

Especially in the area of allowing the Republicans to win because if their worldview is assimilated, their extraction schemes not only unpunished but unreformed and largely encouraged, even enforced by the state, our civil liberties diminishing, our ideals not only turned away from but openly mocked, our buying power for basics continue to diminish, and we see a deliberate and relentless effort to shock doctrine our sparse safety nets and education systems and it limits the ability for those who care about fundemental ideals to campaign in good faith.

If I can get someone out on the old "lesser of two evils" or "look at those crooked, stupid, evil, phony ass, pantysniffing hypocrits" then I'll go for it but I'm not up for an unpaid sales gig and coming out of pocket. I'll work for my Congressman and expect the logical "reverse coattails" to help, that is what I "can do" and I'm no kid or fairweather voter.

Those that share the agenda had best do the heavy lifting and digging deep into empty pockets and content to get votes.

Picking a poison is one thing, putting out money I can't afford and giving up my time and resources for the privilege is another.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

36. OBAMA BAD! REAL, REAL BAD!!

Idiots!!

[fujiyama]

38. Yeah that national youth registration for republicans

is going great! Hahahaha, what with their slut shaming and opposition to birth control. I'm sure Ricky and his ilk will appeal to young women.

Seriously, the only republican I've seen any young people interested in is Ron Paul and his campaign is DOA. The only reason he appeals is because he favors marijuana legalization and ending a lot of foreign involvements. People don't know half the story about him, like his racist articles, his anti choice stance, and his extreme nutty views on well...just about everything.

The others are fucking nutcases in their own right - Newt Gingrich? Yeah! Go twice divorced philandering ass hole that favors child labor! Mitt Romney? I made as much money as your total student loans in half a day! Rick Santorum - Anyone that knows anything about politics my age cracks up at his name even being mentioned.

While I have my own disappointment with Obama on certain issues, considering the ass holes on the other side he has to deal with (and quite a few even on this side of aisle), he's done a good job.

[Saving Hawaii]

48. The Democrats really need to get some voices on a national platform to steal these issues.

Wrong Paul gets a huge amount of credibility among young Democrats simply because he's willing to say what the Democrats aren't. The Republican Party is on the wrong side of both of these issues and few of my peers who will rah-rah Wrong Paul have any idea how batshit crazy he is.

Maybe it's just that I live in NorCal, but marijuana legalization is hugely popular up here (except for the growers who mostly oppose it). And it's amazing all the different walks of life that support it. I remember sitting in a room at a medical clinic (an orthopedic surgeon) and hearing him through the thins walls speaking to somebody else (an assistant?) about smoking pot. I've been around cops who are fully supportive of it. Just the other day I was speaking with one who said all you need is a 215 card and then it's legal. He segued into a story about a cousin who had cancelled his 215 card because he was worried that it put him on a government registry. He chirped that if somebody is that paranoid, maybe they should stop smoking the green stuff.

I realize that this may be an issue we simply can't play well on a national level, but I know that in California we've been hammering the Republicans on this for some time. It's a great 'culture war' issue for us. And the Democratic Party doesn't need to go on record as being a crusader for marijuana legalization, but it'd do their brand a lot of credibility if they at least had some high-profile voices talking about it.

Barack Obama ran with "I smoked pot. And I inhaled. That was the point." Recently federal agents have been busting local dispensaries around where I live and federal attorneys have been blackmailing numerous local cities into banning dispensaries. Threats on the level of city officials facing criminal charges if they allowed dispensaries.

Somebody important needs to be saying this is wrong and Obama really needs to get his estate under control.

[Warren DeMontague]

53. I actually think pot legalization would play very well nationally, especially w/ proper framing.

Beyond personal liberty and bodily soveriegnity issues, there's the hypocrisy issue as you noted, there's the failure-of-the-current-approach angle, and there's the VERY important fact that we're right now spending $60 Billion a year -not incl. incarceration costs, mind you- to wage war on cancer grannies and jamband fans for smoking a relatively harmless plant. If we frame the issue as "stop wasting tax dollars, oh and if we legalize and tax it, we could bring in X amt. of additional revenue"... I think the public would come around even faster than they already are.

[ibegurpard]

39. replies to this thread are perfect example of how NOT to try to re-engage these kids

[Luminous Animal]

46. Let's do the time warp... YEAH!

These kids are in their 20s have lived most of their lives with their country at war and are living in a 25% unemployment rate.

[Luminous Animal]

60. I didn't bring up Nader and neither did Perlstein....

DUers did in some illogical attempt to refute Perlstein's article.

Perlstein's thesis... young voters are less inclined to "brand" themselves as a member of the Democratic Party.

DU's response: NADER NADER NADER PAUL PAUL PAUL TROLL TROLL TROLL.

[Fumesucker]

47. Eat your peas..

Yum!

[LetTimmySmoke]

43. I can sum up the Democrats' problem with young voters in three words:

War
On
Drugs

[Warren DeMontague]

51. I'll agree with you there. A lot of us old farts are tired of it, too.

That and unapologetic defense of reproductive rights and full support for LGBT marriage equality are areas where our Party is sadly behind the times.

These sorts of things give me hope, though:

http://www.fearlesscampaign.com/

I think our party leaders will get a clue, soon. I hope.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Purely anecdotal, but today at the Student Walk Out

not only were they URGED to register to vote but when asked how many were already registered, over sixty percent raised hands, maybe more.

Kids don't like what has happened, but they also realize, at least in the land of fruit and nuts that they cannot sit this one out.

[pstokely]

62. This doesn't mean good news for the Repukes, young cons are likely to identify themselves as Repukes

Young lefties just aren't as likely to identify themselves as Dems

[Obamacare]

63. Please, this article is just a scare tactic

President Obama, has his army on the ground as I type organizing and registering new voters. Sure some of those who voted for Obama in 08 may not be enthusiastic as of March 2012, but after the convention and debates are underway lets talk then about enthusiasm. I hate to say it, but there will never be a successful 3rd party candidate. The Democratic party will be the party to fall apart for a 3rd party candidate to be even halfway successful and the GOP knows this. Which is why they send out guys like Nader to promote voting 3rd party to dems who feel they are disenfranchised. The far right wingnuts and even center right rethugs will never vote 3rd party, they are loyal to the GOP. And they represent at least 40-45% of the electorate, so if half of registered dems ever decided to vote 3rd party, its a win for the GOP. I see right through their BS with this 3rd party nonsense.

[pampango]

67. True, but today's GOP is "as relevant to what America is becoming as an ice pick in New Orleans."

Robert Reich: A party of birthers, creationists, theocrats, climate-change deniers, nativists, gay-bashers, anti-abortionists, media paranoids, anti-intellectuals, and out-of-touch country clubbers cannot govern America.

They were not pleased to have a Democrat back in the White House in 2008, let alone a black one. They rose up in the 2010 election cycle as “tea partiers” and have by now pushed the GOP further right than it has been in more than eighty years. Even formerly sensible senators like Olympia Snowe, Orrin Hatch, and Dick Lugar are moving to the extreme right in order to keep their seats.

At this rate the GOP will end up on the dust heap of history. Young Americans are more tolerant, cosmopolitan, better educated, and more socially liberal than their parents. And relative to the typical middle-aged America, they are also more Hispanic and more shades of brown. Today’s Republican Party is as relevant to what America is becoming as an ice pick in New Orleans.

http://robertreich.org/post/18391045294

[woo me with science]

71. Kick

[AtomicKitten]

77. This piece stands in stark contrast to young people

who were in grade school on 9-11-2001 and celebrated OBL's demise. I believe the majority of the youth vote will be similarly enthusiastic once the O campaign really gets going. Make no mistake, the O campaign will mine that resource.

[Arkana]

80. They may not be registering as Democrats, but you haven't shown me any polling

or research that says they're gravitating towards the right.

Hell, I'm not a registered Democrat either--I don't even call myself one outside of discussing politics with friends.

[Aerows]

81. Republicans have a REAL problem

And I'm not going to worry about young people when it's clear that the Republican party has a problem connecting with voters that don't have 13th century views.

We'll deal with it as it shakes out in the election. I'm not inclined to panic since my 80 year old parents think Republicans have gone off the rails. They show up every election and are conservative. These are Mississippi Republicans for heaven's sake.

When my Dad and my Mom think Republicans have gone off the rails, I assure you, they have. Even my sister who is the staunchest Republican in the universe is starting to think more deeply. That's because of my mother educating her that reducing women's reproductive rights is dangerous, but my sister was always rather short-sighted and is enamored with the Baptist church that is the whackiest available. She can't have kids and has to take birth control because becoming pregnant will kill her.

But, of course, that makes her a slut. She was a virgin at marriage, but she's a slut since that's what all women are that have ever had sexual intercourse to the right. I'm waiting for a Republican to tell my Brother in Law to his face that he's married to a slut. He's 6'4" and, like all of us in our family, practices martial arts.

Yep, my sister is a slut, and I'm not a slut because I don't take birth control.