Hillary Clinton, Snapchat, selfies and the road to wooing millennials

[BlueMTexpat]

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/10/hillary-clinton-millennial-voters-iowa-caucus

It's a positive article generally about the two Dem leading candidates.

The unleashing of Dunham, with her tribe of young, feminist followers, is part of a concerted effort to attract the young and the cool to Clinton’s increasingly confident campaign.

While Clinton maintains a commanding national lead in the race for the Democratic nomination her surprise challenger from the left, 74-year-old Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, has attracted many young voters. Indeed, an NBC poll of Iowa voters released on Sunday put him on 45% support, only 3% behind Clinton.
...
“Nobody thought that young people would do what they did in 2008, until they did,” Della Volpe said. “This is a constituency that can still play a big role in determining the nominee of both parties.”

Therefore, Clinton is leaving nothing to fate – posing for selfies with supporters and celebrities, joining Snapchat, touring campus colleges, dancing on Ellen DeGeneres’ TV show, ribbing Donald Trump (and herself) on Saturday Night Live, and even taping a segment for a Comedy Central show, Broad City.

[William769]

1. Young voter turnout historically is very low. I don't see it changing this year

With the exception of probably young female voters.

Just my opinion.

[denem]

3. Actually William, that is changing,

Last edited Sun Jan 10, 2016, 04:41 PM - Edit history (3)

at least in Presidential Elections

In 2012, 19% of voters were aged between 18-29, compared with 16% 65 and over.
11% were 18-24 (further study below)

From JFK onwards Democrats have always held some advantage with younger voters compared to the average, even during Republican landslides- with one exception - Gore 2000. The Democratic vote collapsed amongst 18-24 year olds from 55/35 Clinton/Dole to 47/47 Bush/Gore. Nader voting can't explain that. The total for the election was 48/48. Again, this is the only example of polling since JFK where the Democraticg Candidate did not have a relative advantage with 18-24 year old voters, or 21-24 voters, where applicable.

Why? I would think the explanation was obvious. Tipper Gore explicit lyrics labels on CD, if the stores even carried them, musicians hauled in front of Congress, Al championing various clean up the Internet bills and the V chip, preaching morality during the Impeachment hearings, promises of a massive increase in anti-drug funding 'law enforcement is working' and to top it off, nominating a self appointed morals crucader as his running mate, with all of the youthful appeal as a bout of herpes.

Gore's social conservatism lost him young voters and the election. And if Obama had tied with Romney for 18-29 year olds, Mittens would be president.

Study: Youth vote was decisive

Mitt Romney would have cruised to the White House had he managed to split the youth vote with Barack Obama, according to an analysis released Wednesday.

Obama easily won the youth vote nationally, 67 percent to 30 percent, with young voters proving the decisive difference in Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio, according to an analysis by the Center for Research and Information on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University. Obama won at least 61 percent of the youth vote in four of those states, and if Romney had achieved a 50-50 split, he could have flipped those states to his column, the study said.

About half of all eligible people ages 18-29 voted in Tuesday’s election, roughly the same level as 2008, according to Peter Levine, the center’s director. The youth vote’s share of the electorate actually increased slightly from 18 percent to 19 percent. In total, 22 million-23 million young people voted, according to the analysis.

Levine and Rock The Vote President Heather Smith both said in a conference call with reporters on Wednesday that increased turnout over presidential elections in 2004, 2008 and 2012 shows high voter turnout is a “new normal” with the millennial generation, compared to less engaged voters in Generation X. In the 1990s, youth turnout was regularly less than 40 percent.

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/11/study-youth-vote-was-decisive-083510

[BlueMTexpat]

5. I know that the young voters

in my extended household are pretty excited about this election. The young females are primarily for Hillary; the males are either divided among the three candidates or undecided. Thank heavens, all will vote Dem in the GE.

As denem points out, the youth vote seems to be getting more important, at least in Presidential elections. I hope that will be the case in 2016. But I wish that the enthusiasm would translate generally - among ALL age groups - to the off year and local elections as well. They are every bit as important in the long run.

IMO, these LONG lead-ups to elections actually discourage some voters. And with the constant fundraising that our totally dysfunctional system requires, it seems that some are no sooner elected than they have to begin fundraising for the next election instead of paying attention to the real business of helping our society. No wonder some become jaded with the whole process.

The system does need shaking up. But I believe that Hillary is more than up to the task. I REALLY REALLY want her to get that chance.

[denem]

6. When Hillary says she will fight I believe she has the will, ability & motivation

to actually do it, and unlike the early Obama administration, she knows EXACTLY what she is up against. Bernie is liable to be an isolated president, a lame duck from year one.

However, as I keep saying, in the unlikely event of a 2008 magnitude stock market crash, in the.near future, Bernie will win the nomination and so will Trump. Who wins that is anyone's guess. The American people's demand for vengence will be overwhelming.

[Iliyah]

2. K & R

[SunSeeker]

4. K & R

[Cha]

7. Thank you, BlueMTex!

[rbrnmw]

8. thanks