Hillary Clinton Is A HARD SELL To Millennials

[Segami]

-snip-

Hillary’s problems with young voters aren’t just her age and association with a past presidency that occurred when many of these voters were still in diapers. Hillary’s messaging tends to be out-of-tune with the aspirations of young voters. Take this Clinton campaign email attempting to raise money in anticipation of the general election. After some obligatory insults against her opponent, the campaign reassures their supporters:

"..But we’re going to challenge Donald Trump and his campaign. He’s not going to build a grassroots organizing program to reach voters at their doors — but that’s exactly how this campaign is spending its time. He doesn’t think that data is important (which is literally a thing he says in interviews). We, uhm, disagree — and ground every decision that we make in the best science we can find. And most importantly, we’re going to rebut every ugly, divisive argument he makes every time he opens his dumb mouth..."

In other words, Hillary’s own campaign is arguing that it’s not her message, political vision or experience that’s going to defeat Donald Trump. Her political machine can do The Donald in. Clinton is advertising to her donors that their money will be used for more polling, paid door knocking and high priced politicos to craft the most rigorously message-tested talking points... all those elements of politics that voters - particularly young voters - abhor. Clinton might assume that Millennials, the most tech-savvy generation, will embrace anything related to “data.” Yet Millennials’ love of technology stems from how it empowers them, as individuals, not that it can reduce them to mere data points and create opportunities for manipulation. Almost as off-putting as when Hillary showcases herself as a hardened political tactician is when she attempts to refashion herself as an outsider dedicated to taking on the establishment. Here’s another revealing campaign email:

"..I want to make sure you saw the news about Sheldon Adelson. This guy is an infamous conservative casino magnate, and this week, he pledged to raise ungodly amounts of money for Donald Trump — maybe more than $100 million, according to The New York Times.

$100 million! And right now, we’re assuming that a big chunk of that money is going STRAIGHT to funding vicious ads against Hillary in places like Ohio and Florida.

While Trump takes mammoth checks from billionaires who’d get mammoth tax cuts if he became president, we’re building our campaign a different way: ...we need everyone to step up to take on Trump and his army of billionaires. Can you help right now (and claim your free Team Hillary sticker!)?.."

Even the most low-information voter knows that Mrs. Clinton is hardly shocked by money in politics. In fact, the former First Lady is renowned for raking in hundred-thousand-dollar checks from big banks and foreign governments. Bernie Sanders knew this and consistently highlighted Mrs. Clinton’s cozy corporatism, understanding that young, idealistic voters crave a different kind of politics, which prioritizes regular people’s interests over the politically-connected.


cont'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heather-higgins/hillary-is-a-hard-sell-to_b_10463656.html

[Segami]

1. An extremely 'hard sell' to say the least...

[Cali_Democrat]

5. Millennials aren't the only people who vote...

[bvf]

24. And millennials aren't the only ones

she's going to have a hard time convincing, either.

Kissy kissy cute cute.

[RufusTFirefly]

27. I'm not a Millennial by a long shot

... and unless she swaps brains with someone who's actually remotely progressive, she's an impossible sell for me.

Her record speaks loud and clear.

[SCantiGOP]

70. She's not a hard sell

if you know who she's running against.
And that will be all anyone hears about from Labor Day to Election Day.

[RufusTFirefly]

71. Gee, what an inspiring message! n/t

[SCantiGOP]

90. No

I would call it compelling.

I was a Clinton supporter from the beginning, even though Sanders is one of my favorite members of the US Senate. But if I weren't a supporter, knowing her opponent would make a very compelling reason to actively work for her election.

[bigdarryl]

44. There the least to vote

[workinclasszero]

46. Millennials hardly ever vote

If a person or a group doesn't vote politicians can safely ignore them I guess.

[lancer78]

56. Lol

The 18-29 demographic was 2% more of the electorate in 2012 than the 60+ crowd.

[Marr]

72. No response.

I'm surprised he didn't already know that info, considering their devotion to 'the best science' and 'data' and all.

[whatthehey]

96. And turnout 30-35% less

You don't matter if you can't get off your ass to the polls.

[Demsrule86]

85. Don't listen to this crap

Lots of smart kids will vote for Hillary...my kids will. Every person in my family...Ohio, Georgia and Connecticut will vote for the Democratic nominee...Hillary Clinton as will all their friends.

[kstewart33]

92. No she isn't.

The general election campaign has just begun. Let's see how things are looking in October.

For now, it's Hillary or Trump. And no millennial in their right mind will vote for Trump.

What are all these posts on allegedly how badly Hillary is doing about?

I don't understand it. Bernie's wipeout tonight in WDC is the exclamation point to the fact that he is done.

So what are you trying to achieve? Is it sour grapes? Or is there something more positive?

[Metric System]

2. That's presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton.

[SCantiGOP]

3. I took everybody off Ignore yesterday

Guess I need to put em back on until Thursday.

bye bye

[Segami]

4. Buh-bye!

[Cali_Democrat]

8. Your random caps OP's didn't work and now Bernie has lost the nomination.

How do you feel about that?

Are you finally going to get a new keyboard now that that the primary is over?

[bvf]

28. Neither did your ignorance of

apostrophe usage.

[AgingAmerican]

33. Will you survive the transparency vacations being turned back on?

[Cali_Democrat]

38. Hillary wins DC

Bernie gets smacked down in the last Democratic primary.

[AgingAmerican]

47. Wow, looking at several Hillary supporters T pages...

Half her supporters will be on forced vacations! Some have over 20 hides!

[RufusTFirefly]

31. Once you leave, Segami, Hillary will be an EASY SELL

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but any perceived flaws in the Clinton campaign are pretty much all your fault.


"You can't see me! You can't see me."

Now please go away and let the converted preach to each other in peace.

I can see the threads now:

Is Hillary the Greatest? Or the Keenest? (Poll)

Cluster bombs get an unfair rep: Here's why

True Confession: I still carry a torch for Henry the K

What Robert Kagan can do for you and your own personal empire

7 more things you can wipe with a cloth

The many moods of Lloyd Blankfein

[larkrake]

135. thats great

[noiretextatique]

196. +1000 eom

[bvf]

201. LOL! It's going to be just peachy!

Risking a hide by using an insufficient number of ass-kissing superlatives is certainly going to pose a challenge.

Waiting for that in the final TOS draft.

[Matt_R]

203. you might get a hide with...

7 more things you can wipe with a cloth

[Herman4747]

12. Can I be on your Ignore List?

It would be such an honor!

[SCantiGOP]

37. Sorry, Herman

You don't meet the high bar I set for Ignore: post the same thing, over and over ad nauseum, and keep your hot link with Huffington active.

[swhisper1]

66. I will keep them off

[bravenak]

6. And Bernie was a hard sell to the rest of us. We did not buy. We have more money than millennials.

We vote more than my fellow millennials because we have voted before and got used to the Responsibility.

[azurnoir]

22. Oh so more money buys the election? interesting

I've learned more about the real Democratic Party this election than in the rest of my life put together well except for 1995-1996 but what I learned there has been confirmed

[Major Nikon]

25. Results...

On Tue Jun 14, 2016, 07:49 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Oh so more money buys the election? interesting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2185699

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is a Democratic message board, and this poster is trashing the Democratic party. Not constructively at all. This is very inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Jun 14, 2016, 07:53 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Rules are pretty simple...you don't get to slam the party as a whole like this on this site.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: One more day.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[bvf]

32. Interesting alert

especially since the alerted post said nothing explicit, other than to call attention to the painfully telling gaffe in the idiotic post it was responding to.

I'd lay good odds on the alerter's handle.

[swhisper1]

68. I never alert- it shows their ignorance and obsessive nature to keep it up

[Go Vols]

202. If the alert didn't care for that,

wonder if they would alert on the current Prez if he posted his views here,re: Obama says he'd be seen as moderate Republican in 1980s

[DebDoo]

57. "We have more money than millennials" and we intend to keep it that way! Vote Hillary!

[bravenak]

60. It is always that way because we have been around longer

A college kid that is taking on debt is not able to pay taxes. Of course they want ours raised so that we can pay for their college, but we are already paying off our own college loans and it's kinda selfish to expect me to pay mine and then turn around and pay theirs too.

[Marr]

82. That's basically the GOP position on social programs, in a nutshell.

I think you're supposed to hide that stuff a little longer.

[bravenak]

86. Oh? So my black struggling self should pay for my own education and the education

of some middle class white kids too? Why? Why should I pay twice and they not even pay once? Us poor black women are just so selfish and right wing saying we cannot afford to pay double so that young white college kids never have to pay once.

[Marr]

87. Again, thanks for stating the standard GOP argument against social programs.

You've got yours, so screw them. I got it.

I'm just going to ignore the embarrassing attempt at changing the topic.

[bravenak]

91. I'm paying for mine. They can too. They aint no better than me that I should pay their way

[Marr]

98. We should end welfare, WIC... everything like that then, right? /nt

[bravenak]

100. Why would you say that?

His plan taxes poor folks to provide these 'free' programs. Even the working poor, of which I am one, will take a tax hit to pay for middle class kids to go to school while their own children cannot even get educated well enough to get into those same schools. Our schools don't prepare our kids for college like those white schools do for white kids, so we get left out but still have to pay that tax. It's a regressive tax scheme to tax the poor to help middle class white kids.

[Marr]

103. Because it would be a social program, obviously.

We all pay for social programs that benefit us all, as a whole. That's the idea. But it wouldn't 'tax poor folks', as you assert. That's nonsense.

Also, I'm sorry, but 'a lot of them have a skin color I don't like' is not an acceptable argument. It's actually pretty offensive.

[Loudestlib]

104. "His plan taxes poor folks to provide these 'free' programs."

I can't tell if you're intentionally lying or just ignorant.

[forjusticethunders]

109. An increase in payroll taxes

Not only taxes poor folks, but disproportionately taxes them and funnels that money to the children of primarily white middle class kids who are more likely to attend colleges.

Nobody is arguing against social programs, but you are arguing for yet ANOTHER upper middle class tax giveaway like the home mortgage credit.

[Loudestlib]

113. So, it's ignorance then?

[bvf]

116. Yes, it's often hard to tell.

I usually go with "intentionally lying." "Ignorant" is better applied here to the reasoning behind taking her off FFR, IMO.

[ljm2002]

160. His plan for free college tuition does not tax poor folks...

...it taxes Wall Street. It puts a small transaction tax on high speed Wall Street trades. So no, the working poor, of which you claim to be one, will NOT take a tax hit to pay for middle class kids to go to school.

And by the way, your framing is very telling: "tax the poor to help middle class white kids" -- not only does it NOT tax the poor, it DOES help any person, of any gender, age or color, who seeks higher education in this country.

BTW if you are struggling so much, then a Wall Street transaction tax will have zero impact on your finances. Even if you have a couple of investment vehicles like an IRA or a few grand in another type of investment account (which is certainly not typical of anyone poor, working or not), you will not notice any difference to your finances when a small transaction tax is applied to high speed trades.

Your analysis is, quite simply, wrong. And the basis of your analysis, depending as it does on both class and race, is a mirror of all the Republicans over the years who did not want to pay taxes that went to free public education, or welfare, because it might help "those" people.

[Matt_R]

204. How about a rebate for those that can prove they completed a 2 or 4 year program.

Same goes for tech school. If you can prove you completed the equivalent of a 2 or 4 year program you get a tax rebate for the cost of the program, up to a certain cost of course. Same as PELL grants are calculated.

I wonder how many could get behind that kind of program?

[bravenak]

206. I could get behind that

Or a tax exemption for those making under 50 grand singly or 100 for a couple and 125 for a family. Places like San Francisco are so expensive and highly taxed that a family will suffer from additional taxes.

[bvf]

111. If you've been to college

then you should understand the nominative case.

I think they cover that in high school, now that I think about it.

In any event, you should seek a refund, or at least a do-over.

[bravenak]

112. You need to stop minding mine and tend to yourn

[bvf]

114. Mine is fine.

Yourn is clearly in need of improvement, what with your tendency to slip in and out of patois and all.

KWIS?

[bravenak]

123. You still aint mindin yourn

Don't obsess and make admiration over my vernacular. Aint fitting.

[bvf]

175. Reading that, all I can think of

is Tennessee Ernie Ford, with a hint of Irwin Corey.

[chwaliszewski]

141. Oh, not this again.

[DrDan]

149. results from the alert

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Peddling right-wing talking points: "College kids want tax payers to pay for their free stuff"

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:33 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Wow, a completely ignorant post by bravenak, but unfortunately for the alerter, I believe ignorance of this magnitude should be spotlighted, not hidden.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is one of the worst alerts I've ever seen. I'm alerting the admins about this too.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Quit alert-stalking this poster. What she said was factual, not slagging kids.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: wow - skin is pretty darned thin on this one
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ridiculous alert.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing hurtful, that's life.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm not a bravenak fan, but this alert is pure bullshit.

[noiretextatique]

197. I thought you liked Bernie

But went with Hillary to get more stuff, even though you really despise the Clintons.

[Tarc]

7. Millennials aren't the party base they think they are

Bernie chose to go all-out in catering to them, and lost the primary.

[lunamagica]

10. That pobably was his biggest mistake

[workinclasszero]

49. It was his biggest mistake by far

[brush]

133. That was one of them. Ignoring the black vote in early primaries . . .

was another huge one.

[notadmblnd]

159. For such an oppressed and discriminated group of people

They certainly are powerful. How does that happen?

[brush]

174. Ahhh . . . just knowing how to use the power of the vote.

Are you disputing that Sanders' campaign dismissed the importance of the early southern primaries, thus missing the opportunity to gain votes and delegates, delegates and votes that contributed largely to Clinton's lead that was maintained throughout the campaign?

[notadmblnd]

193. I said exactly what I said.

Nothing more. You go ahead and read into it whatever you want. HRC supporters always do.

[brush]

194. And what you said has a dog whistle quality to it. Nice to know where you're coming from.

[notadmblnd]

195. Only a true bigot can hear dog whistles.

So that says more about you than it does about me.

[brush]

207. Yeah, I hear dog whistles pretty good, being African American and all.

And your disparaging post sounds quite familiar.

[notadmblnd]

208. So you say.

[uponit7771]

218. Nah, people can be aware of bigoted thinking and it always smells the same

[uponit7771]

217. Voting?

[Arugula Latte]

41. Get back to us in 2020, and 2024, and 2028 ...

The Millennials ain't buying what Hillary types are selling.

[Tarc]

48. Funny thing how time works; they won't be 20-somethings by then

[Arugula Latte]

51. Yeah, but they will still be wise to the propaganda.

This generation is MUCH more "on" to the bullshit shenanigans of the DINO types. They get it. They grew up with the Internet, and they are quick to identify propaganda, whether it's corporatist-DLC-Third Way-Clintonian bullshit, religious propaganda, advertising propaganda, you name it. The genie is out of the bottle for these "kids." There's no going back. They're not going to suddenly think: "Ya know, it really IS a good idea to have a warmongering foreign policy, cater to Wall St., and tell people who want the basic minimums of affordable housing and healthcare to essentially go fuck themselves."

[Tarc]

63. Oh, you.

You'll see.

[Marr]

83. They soon will be. /nt

[Tarc]

101. 'fraid not

People of color have been key in the 2008 and 2016 nominations. Sanders not courting their vote is what cost him the primary.

[Marr]

106. Milennial PoC were not a Hillary demographic.

So far as I can tell.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/191465/millennials-sanders-dislike-election-process.aspx

[Tarc]

166. PoC overall were

By a mile.

[Marr]

176. And my point was that milennials will soon be the party.

See?

[Tarc]

178. Unfortunately, they will not be

Keep swingin...

[Marr]

188. You're argument is that the younger generation will not replace you?

Are you Count Dracula?

Whatever. You're either not taking the time to consider other peoples' comments or you can't process very simple sentences. Either way, this is a waste of my time.

Have a nice life.

[Tarc]

189. I'll give you a hint

Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.

- Clemenceau

[chwaliszewski]

142. I must disagree.

I believe most 'people of color', as you put it, already had their minds made up that they were supporting Hillary. You could say the same thing about most Democrats for that matter. Hillary has been a household name since Bill was president so there was definitely the familiarity advantage. Bernie's forte emprise was bringing otherwise disinterested young voters into the fray with a sense of enthusiasm. Some dissipation is to be expected but this will not be the last you'll see of Berniacs.

[DrDan]

150. exactly - he played to a demographic that finds it inconvenient to actually vote - not a

winning strategy in my mind

but what do I know . . .

[SheilaT]

9. She's also a hard sell to a surprising number of older voters.

Even older women like myself.

Here's the thing: A lot of older older voters will hold their noses and vote for Hillary because they so much don't want to see a President Trump. It's my opinion that a lot of the younger voters will say, "Fuck, no!" and not vote at all. Or maybe for some third party candidate. Which means that four and eight years down the road those same younger voters will have learned the lesson that their vote doesn't count, so why bother?

I realize that my assessment doesn't apply to all Millennials, but probably to enough of them to affect voting patterns for the next several Presidential cycles.

[Herman4747]

11. Well, of course. She seeks no major fundamental improvements...

...she just wants to be president.

On the other hand, Bernie's whole vision is future-oriented.

[brush]

16. Her positions are different only by degrees than Sanders'

Those degrees make the difference as to whether they get through Congress or not.

With the obstructionist Congress that Obama has faced, most voters know Sanders' "free college and single payer health care" would not stand a chance getting through Congress.

Millennials maybe maybe didn't get that. Older voters did, which is why they voted mostly for Clinton, and which is why she won.

[Qutzupalotl]

21. through THIS Congress, true.

But give our nominee a political revolution (a Democratic Senate and House, probably several cycles away), then there's a lot we can accomplish, provided there is leadership with vision at the top.

[brush]

42. Yes, it all depends on what Congress the president has to work with.

[Herman4747]

55. Anything Hillary poses would not get through the

Republican House, and a Senate not filibuster proof.

Bernie's proposals are not made for the immediate future, but establish a long-term goal, when the Democrats do get sufficient control over the government. Harry Truman was wanting health care coverage; this made it easier later for someone like LBJ to get it done.

Hillary, on the other hand, offers only trivial tweaks.

[swhisper1]

61. neither will her policies get past progressives

[Herman4747]

62. That's true too. nt

[swhisper1]

64. If it is Trump she ends up debating, she will win hands down. I never doubted this

but everything she proposes will go right under a cloud of suspicion. I would not want to be in her shoes. Being hated day after day, everyone undermining you. She does not have Obamas cool confidence and class, she will crack, and we will suffer

[brush]

89. There are ways. Obama faced the same obstacles and got a lot done.

[libdem4life]

97. They are far apart philosophically. He's a Unionist/Socialist/Worker

she's a Management/Capitalist/Board Room Rep. That overshadows everything else. He marched with workers. She accepted 6 figure "speaking fees".

Night and day. There are a few things that cross over that dyad, but not that important, given both represent Democratic Party policies.

[brush]

110. Ahhh . . . she's the one who appointed a union rep to the platform committee.

[larkrake]

126. makes me suspicious of that rep. Did he play pattycake?

[libdem4life]

179. So? I know what a Token is...I'd guess there's not much difference here.

Good try, however. A number of Union Management (now full fledged capitalists) endorsed her. That would be the least she could do.

[brush]

181. Did Sanders?

[libdem4life]

182. Did Sanders what? He has marched with workers his entire life, AFAIK

I mean, your nifty two words sound a bit trite if that question means what I think it seems. Nor do I think he makes speeches at the Court of the Corporate Kings/Queens.

You can discuss my premise, if you like. But gotchas don't work for me. You have to think to discuss...agree or disagree.

ETA: It's usually Crickets when asked to think and write something intelligent. Please, prove me wrong.

[brush]

183. OK. I know he appointed Cornell West to the platform committee. How about a union rep?

[libdem4life]

184. I have no idea. That would requre a Google Search. And also,

it really doesn't make any difference much, before they only approved one, IIRC, and you can bet it wouldn't have been a Union Rep.

Again, just guessing and too busy to go searching. I just know the lifelong tendencies of the two candidates.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, however.

[larkrake]

137. they are nothing alike and they have never been friends. she has intentionally gone rogue

on him as Sos and in the campaign. It will get worse. she will undo his work and start wars

[DrDan]

163. one has 41 senate endorsements, the other has 1

you got it exactly right when you state they are "nothing alike" - one can build a coalition, the other . . . not so much

[libdem4life]

180. Thanks. You make my case, to a tee. How many of Bernie's type got

all the way to a Corporate Boardroom Cheerleading Group. Now, before you retort that he's a member of said group, I'd remind you that he is from a tiny NE state who are staunch Independents...both Dem and Rep. The only reason he is in the Senate is that Independent Moniker was what Vermont chose to send to represent them.

Then there's the next slam...using the Democratic Party. We'll they've been using him for a number of years to get bills through, so it was the least they could do...even though many of them, HRC too, thought he had a Socialist's Chance of doing any damage. You know...grumpy old man, et al. Seems an awful lot of folks woke up, grew up, came out of the shadows, or put away their clothespins. I'm of the latter.

And lastly, anyone who thinks he's done...just isn't reading and/or thinking.

ETA: No real, card-carying Democrat really entered the race...only giving slight cover to Her Highness and dropped out quickly. Then, Bernie reluctantly thought he might change the national conversation a bit and hopped into the race. His success...and it was a success as millions of Americans voted for him...was as surprising to him as it was to the Dem Establishment.

[DrDan]

191. he's done . . .

as is the talk of "revolution" and the "movement". Back to the back-bench and drafting of amendments.

[politicaljunkie41910]

50. He's 74 now. Even he didn't think he could get his own plan through in his first term

should he have won. Just how much future do you think is left in that vision?

[upaloopa]

13. Will you ever stop bashing Hillary?

You are not having any kind of effect. Who ever is giving you this stuff is wasting time and resources.

[charlyvi]

14. She's beating Trump 12 points in the latest Bloomberg poll.

I don't really think she's having a problem getting enough voters.

As far as millennials go:

In a hypothetical Clinton v. Trump contest in November, voters under 35 would choose Clinton by a crushing 52%-19%, a preference that crosses demographic lines. Among whites, she'd be backed by nearly 2-1, 45%-26%. Among Hispanics, by more than 4-1, 61%-14%. Among Asian Americans, by 5-1, 60%-11%. Among African Americans, by 13-1, 67%-5%.

And the yawning gender gap she has against Sanders would vanish: Clinton would carry young men and women by almost identical margins of more than 2-1.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/14/poll-millennials-clinton-sanders-trump-president/81612520/

[qdouble]

17. Don't go around destroying the OP's nonsense

"In a hypothetical Clinton v. Trump contest in November, voters under 35 would choose Clinton by a crushing 52%-19%, a preference that crosses demographic lines."

The same group of voters that came out heavy for Bernie are going to switch to Trump? Not likely.

[charlyvi]

78. I know.

I'm so sorry to post actual stats against seven paragraphs of pure opinion...by someone named Heather Higgins. Not exactly Walter Cronkite. I'm sorry....so rude!

[Matt_R]

170. Who did the other 29% poll for?

or does a third just not count for this poll.

[Matt_R]

171. so who did the rest go for?

Last edited Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

voters under 35 missing 29%
among whites missing 29%
among hispanics missing 25%
among asians missing 29%
among african americans missing 28%

I'm seeing a pattern. So the 25-29% polled who did they go for or do they just not exist for this poll? Looks like almost a third don't like either candidate, I wonder if they will go third party or just "sit this one out."

On edit: I see now that the USA today article is from March and doesn't show a match-up polling Clinton vs Trump. Carry on.

[vintx]

212. An article from March... no Clinton vs Trump comparison... and they're high fiving each other

over their mad knowledge skillz.

This place has changed so very fucking much.

We used to mock freepers for that kind of shit.

[uponit7771]

219. Well... there you go with facts and shit..

[NorthCarolina]

18. They can't make the campaign about issues so they will have to resort to the usual beauty contest

with some cat fighting and name calling back and forth between the candidates.

[yourout]

19. More like....."No" Sale.

Not buying what she is shoveling.

[yallerdawg]

20. Bloomberg poll released TODAY.

As much as some may hate it, the Democratic Party is coming together!

“Clinton has a number of advantages in this poll, in addition to her lead,” said pollster J. Ann Selzer, who oversaw the survey. “Her supporters are more enthusiastic than Trump’s and more voters overall see her becoming a more appealing candidate than say that for Trump.”

Guess who likes Hillary!

Those who backed Clinton's nomination challenger, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, are mostly rallying around her. She receives 55 percent from Sanders supporters, while Trump gets 22 percent and Johnson gets 18 percent.

Oh - and this!

There's greater division on whether the U.S. should ban the sale of all semi-automatic or automatic rifles to civilians, with 50 percent saying no and 48 percent saying yes. A plurality of 47 percent agree with Trump's suggestion that avoiding the phrase “radical Islam” makes the U.S. look weak in fighting terrorism, while 44 percent disagree.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-14/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-june-2016

[larkrake]

127. not impressed. of course she is more likable than Trump--duh

she will win easily against trump, thats a given The press will falsely keep it a race for ratings, but its a done deal. If the RNC flips trump, then she can sweat it. Johnson is now at 12%. This poll is waaaay off about Bernies followers. none will go trump, some will go Johnson and fewer to Stein, Most will write in Bernie or just down ticket

I think Hill wins by a nose, Johnson then Trump dead last

[msongs]

23. endless conspiracy theories that are opinions. millennials are not the exclusive tools of bernie

[still_one]

30. no they are not, and the polls indicate for every one Sanders supporter that won't support Hillary,

six Sanders supporters will

[Buns_of_Fire]

26. We're damn serious, Maddi.

Look, if you could afford a dollar, you can afford two. If you can afford two, you could afford five. And if you can afford $5, you can afford $2700. You know it and I know it. So cough it up. I'm not kidding, Maddi.

Remember -- free Team Hillary sticker!

[still_one]

29. and I suppose Bernie would be an easy "sell" to Hillary supporters. Those who are having issues

whether they will or will not vote for Hillary over trump, are not going to be convinced by anything with that mindset

[Lizzie Poppet]

34. That nonsense should be a hard sell to anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex.

To be so tone-deaf as to try and ding Trump over billionaire supporters is simply cringeworthy. It's like she has no real clue about how she is viewed by huge swaths of the electorate. I get the impression that she's usually surrounded by sycophants and yes-people.

[LLStarks]

35. This Millennial supported her since 2007 and I prefer the term "Gen Y" eom

[Wednesdays]

115. Well then that's it. Fold the tents, it's all over.

Because LLStarks has backed her for ten years, she's got the millennial vote locked up.

[Il_Coniglietto]

36. That's funny

Because I've found it to be much easier than you think. Most of my friends voted for Hillary in the primary and a few voted for Bernie. But all of them have November 8 circled on their calendars.

[ButterflyBlood]

39. Good thing Donald Trump is an even harder one

Nt

[Arugula Latte]

40. The Millennials I know flat out loathe Hillary.

This is Oregon. These young people are liberal and progressive and worldly. They hate the direction the country is heading in. Her message of "stop asking for free stuff!" does not resonate with them when they see where the sympathies of Hillary and other DINOs types lie -- paving the way for corporations and Wall St. to screw the little people over ever more. These kids are SMART. They don't buy the DWS/HRC/DLC propaganda. My oldest kid will not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. Global warming is his #1 issue, and he knows Hillary won't do jack about it.

I know a few college-age kids whose 50-something mothers adore Hillary. The "kids" themselves despise her. It's an interesting contrast.

The party has to change if it wants to stay relevant for the next 20 years.

[bigdarryl]

81. Who gives a fuck what they think half these brats most of the time don't vote

I bet if you ask them who there Congressman and Senators are they couldn't tell you.Plus if they don't like what's going on in politics they should run in local elections

[Arugula Latte]

186. Wrong. These kids are politically aware and voted.

They are up on issues and are fans of Senator Merkeley. One also volunteered for Merkeley.

But how typically condescending for them to be called "brats" just because they see Hillary for the DINO she is.

[noiretextatique]

198. You have to love how welcoming

Hillary supporters are The contempt simply oozes from their pores. Young people are not stupid...they can feel it too. Especially from the presumptive nominee, and her husband.

[Arugula Latte]

199. Yep. These "kids" give me hope. They see through Clintonian bullshit.

I hope they can shape the Democratic party away from its current Oligarchies 'R' Us form in the coming years.

[KoKo]

43. Shes even a Harder Sell to those of us Not Millennials who have lived through

many Decades of Elections. We know the Clinton's from Term I and they followed Obama through Term II and now They are BACK! So we know quite a bit about the Clintons. Both of them I voted for and worked for in Term I and participated in the battle against the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy."

Luckily...I woke up when it became apparent that we were hoodwinked. I hoped for great things from Obama..."We were so Fired Up...and Ready to Go. Obama was going to "put on his walking shoes and help the Picket Lines for Labor...and various other "promises." Now we are back full circle to Clinton Era Deregulation with NAFTA, Telecom Communications Reform Bill, Commodities/Futures Deregulation and the Welfare Reform Bill and many other "Incremental Changes and Tweaks" that left us a legacy for Bush II and what has followed while the Middle Class is now groveling for Crumbs and the Poor are not even thought about.

[Arugula Latte]

53. Agree 100 percent.

I'm not enabling these DINO a-holes anymore.

[RufusTFirefly]

67. "There's an old saying in Tennessee..."

"There's an old saying in Tennessee...I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee, that says, 'Fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. Fool me... You can't get fooled again!'"

[vintx]

213. ...

[Sancho]

45. Who cares? Why spend time and money on people who don't vote?

The good news is that millennials will grow older, and likely they will vote 20 years from now:



I'll bet there are quite a few dissertations that will be written about the failure of internet trash to change minds, and the failure of big rallies to GOTV.

Hopefully, the new rules will reduce the bash and trash OPs.

[workinclasszero]

52. People who don't vote don't scare anyone even if the internet amps their voices up a lot

I can't believe people still think big rallies mean a pol is going to win. Its been proven time and time again that that's pure BS.

The internet/social media thing is more recent but again seems to show that a large internet/social media campaign is illusory and no predictor of victory in an election.

[seabeckind]

74. Isn't that what W said?

So the only reason to do something for the people is when there is a return to the politician?

[Sancho]

76. You can do things for them, but they don't vote.

The strategy of tearing down Hillary won't get them to vote.

The strategy of posting on Facebook won't get them to vote.

The strategy of having pep rallies don't get them to vote.

Why waste money on strategies that don't work? Has NOTHING TO DO with policies or actions in office.

I started as an educator in 1976 (still going), and it's easy to see why those strategies won't work.

In fact, making pie-in-the-sky promises like "free tuition" and "universal health care" didn't get them to vote!!!

Hillary has a following of people who have seen her values and actions first hand over decades. That's why they vote for her.

Think about it.

[seabeckind]

102. I've seen her judgement and arrived at a different conclusion.

I thought it was only RW people who spit out the free stuff BS.

[Sancho]

105. Nope...Bernie does it often...

people apparently didn't believe him.

[seabeckind]

143. It's a matter of comprehension.

It's hard to fight the bumper sticker, slogan crowd.

Those are the people who think a complex topic can be explained in a slogan and too lazy to research enough to find it can't.

Like: "all they want is free stuff".

Excellent strategy for half the population.

[Sancho]

146. Those of us who studied the proposals didn't like them...

they were economically impossible, and also fostered social injustice.

[seabeckind]

147. A lot like social security in the 30s.

Or medicare. Or alternate energy. Or electricity to the rural areas.

Hard to study and accomplish anything when the people who profit so much from the status quo are screaming at you that it won't work.

I do like the assertion that the opponents studied the issue. But I don't believe it.

[Sancho]

151. sorry, but my union studied Bernie's education proposals extensively...

After looking carefully, asking questions, and involving experts...we determined that Bernie's "tuition plan" would not do:

1.) was very harmful to the public employee retirement funds for most states that were negotiated by unions in many cases
2.) did not address tuition equity or admissions policies that were harmful to minorities and immigrants
3.) was not realistic with regards to most state education budget processes
4.) was particularly harmful to HBCUs
5.) transferred money to the already wealthy instead of supporting those who needed support

We reached the conclusion many months ago (before O'Malley dropped out) that Bernie's plan was the worst. In fact, we ranked him 3rd as a candidate. No wonder that a few months later educator unions endorsed Hillary.

[seabeckind]

152. So what investment fund did the study?

I guess losing their cash cow would cause some losses.

No mention of the benefits of an educated populace? I guess education is too expensive.

Where's your link?

[Sancho]

153. Here's a start..it's an old story...

Basically all 50 states have a retirement fund for employees (teachers, firemen, etc.) who are often represented by unions. If you have an FTT, it would cost those employees salary or benefits. Meanwhile, the wealthy would not pay anyway because they can easily avoid the tax. The wealthy would continue to have their darlings go to the best schools (free) while the less well-off would be relegated to weaker schools.

Bernie Sanders Robin Hood tax

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/
Fully Paid for by Imposing a Robin Hood Tax on Wall Street. This legislation is offset by
imposing a Wall Street speculation fee on investment houses, hedge funds, and other speculators of
0.5% on stock trades (50 cents for every $100 worth of stock), a 0.1% fee on bonds, and a 0.005%
fee on derivatives. It has been estimated that this provision could raise hundreds of billions a year
which could be used not only to make tuition free at public colleges and universities in this country,
it could also be used to create millions of jobs and rebuild the middle class of this country.



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/31/why-free-college-is-really-expensive.html

Why Free College is Really Expensive
Everyone knew Bernie Sanders would propose a tax on Wall Street. But spending that money on college tuition is a cynical handout to the upper-middle class.

Even Sanders himself, however, lists the Robin Hood tax as an afterthought; after all, if you raise a Robin Hood tax you can do a long list of things with the money you get from it (including cutting other taxes, or spending on other initiatives). The emphasis from Sanders’ statements is where the money will go: paying for tuition for public colleges.

The first problem with Sanders’ proposal is that a national tuition subsidy will be counterproductive even on its own terms. The proposal will cut the economic legs out from underneath innovations such as open online courses, which may be on the cusp of delivering low-cost, high-quality college education for all. Organizations trying to deliver radical new models will now have to compete against a $70 billion subsidy for the old system.
Additionally, directing that much guaranteed money into a system is a sure-fire way to accelerate cost inflation. The state may pick up the tab for tuition, but students will still have to pay for ancillary services (such as room, board, textbooks, etc.), and those services will go up in price. These costs are not trivial; for instance, although Sweden has abolished college tuition, students graduate with more debt than students in the United Kingdom, and only slightly less than students in the US. Through economic incompetence, Sanders’ proposal might hit the jackpot of reducing college quality while also increasing cost.
Economically bad policy design from Sanders is not surprising. After all, the man is a self-declared Socialist. His appeal was not policy wonkery; as a protest candidate, Sanders (we hoped) would at least identify the right issues, even if his solutions were unworkable. In this case, Sanders has pointed out the wrong problem.
------------------------

https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/36vmm8/what_are_some_legitimate_arguments_against_bernie/

[–]DeadMonkey321 50 points 12 days ago*
Apparently (according to a tax lawyer who was running around one of the earlier threads), there was no exception for 401k's, meaning that every time the mutual funds in your retirement fund rebalance, which should be a few times a year, you're paying a tax and losing money from your retirement.
Edit: just used the calculator found here to calculate the costs of 0.5% over 40 years assuming you were investing just $5500/year (the max allowable to an IRA). Using these assumptions, this tax would cost you, the average investor, $157,000 over the 40 years you're investing. This is money that I'm sure you'd prefer going towards your retirement.
Note: this isn't 100% accurate as I'm treating this as an addition to the expense ratio which isn't totally correct, but it's a ballpark figure to give the tax some context


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/29/1388484/-Bernie-Sanders-big-idea-has-a-math-problem#
--------------------------
Bernie Sanders' big idea has a math problem

The tax Bernie Sanders is talking about is pretty much like a sales tax on certain financial market transactions. I don't know the exact rate Bernie included in his bill, but the Robin Hood Tax group calls for a rate of 0.5%, or one-tenth the average state sales tax. Given that the total value of transactions in the stock, commodity and various other financial markets numbers in the trillions of dollars annually, the idea that this tax could generate enough to pay for sending young Americans to college would seem reasonable.
For example, such a tax on the $550+ billion spent on stock buybacks by the S&P 500 in 2014 would yield $2.75 billion in taxes. That's just shy of 2% of the total needed and stock buybacks are about the least productive use of corporate funds: American companies are substituting these buybacks for investments in their companies that might produce real growth instead of an illusion. Of course, they do increase the value of executive bonuses and stock options...
But wait! That's a huge chunk of change being taxed to yield only a tiny percentage of the amount Bernie Sanders thinks the market would generate.
The truth is that in order for a financial transaction tax to generate $300 billion at a 0.5% rate, the total amount of taxable financial transactions would have to be $60 trillion. Even at the average sales tax rate of 5%, the amount of taxable transactions has to be $6 trillion annually.
Just to generate enough to pay for public college tuition, the taxable amount has to be at least $29.2 trillion. And that's if nobody comes up with schemes to legally (or not) avoid the tax.
-----------------
http://chronicle.com/article/Bernie-Sanderss-Charming/231387?cid=megamenu


http://www.sbafla.com/fsb/

The State Board of Administration (SBA) was created by the Florida Constitution and is governed by a three-member Board of Trustees (Trustees), comprised of the Governor as Chair, the Chief Financial Officer and the Attorney General.

The Trustees, in concert with legislative directives, have ultimate oversight. They delegate authority to the Executive Director/Chief Investment Officer to carry out the strategic direction in the day-to-day financial investments and operations of the agency. The Executive Director/CIO manages approximately 190 professional investment and administrative support staff.

The SBA is required to invest assets and discharge its duties in accordance with Florida law and in compliance with fiduciary standards of care. Under state law, the SBA and its staff are obliged to:

Make sound investment management decisions that are solely in the interest of investment clients.
Make investment decisions from the perspective of subject-matter experts acting under the highest standards of professionalism and care, not merely as well-intentioned persons acting in good faith.

http://chronicle.com/article/Bernie-Sanderss-Charming/231387?cid=megamenu
July 6, 2015 Bernie Sanders's Charming, Perfectly Awful Plan to Save Higher Education By Kevin Carey
Bernie Sanders, the self-described socialist senator, Internet hero, and apparent front-runner in the race for second place in the 2016 Democratic presidential campaign, has ideas about higher-education reform. Like the man himself, they are bold, charmingly utopian, kind of weird, and most important for how they might eventually move the boundaries of mainstream political culture.
Sanders wants every student in America to be able to attend a public college or university without paying tuition. Legislation he proposed to that effect a few weeks ago includes a reasonably plausible mechanism of multibillion-dollar federal subsidies and new regulation of state spending. The current Congress, it is safe to say, will not soon be passing such a bill.
But in trying to define a new fiscal federalism for American higher education, Sanders has sparked a conversation that is likely to expand. Without something like the Sanders plan, the disgraceful dismantling of public higher education, underway in many states, will certainly continue.
The no-tuition part of the Sanders plan attracted a great deal of attention, aided by canny headline writers who understand that "Bernie Sanders" is catnip for social media. Less discussed was the corollary part of the plan: In exchange for billions of new taxpayer dollars, the federal government would enforce a specific vision of what a high-quality college education means.
States would have to promise that, within five years, "not less than 75 percent of instruction at public institutions of higher education in the State is provided by tenured or tenure-track faculty." In addition, any funds left over after eliminating tuition could be used only for purposes such as "expanding academic course offerings to students," "increasing the number and percentage of full-time instructional faculty," providing faculty members with "supports" such as "professional development opportunities, office space, and shared governance in the institution." States would be prohibited from using the money for merit-based financial aid, "nonacademic facilities, such as student centers or stadiums," or "the salaries or benefits of school administrators."

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/07/08/Pros-and-Cons-Bernie-Sanders-50-Billion-Tax-Ide
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/2000287-Financial-Transaction-Taxes-in-Theory-and-Practice.pdf
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/07/22/bernie-sanders-doesnt-have-a-case-for-a-financial-transactions-tax-it-would-lose-money/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/22/opinion/the-case-for-a-tax-on-financial-transactions.html?_r=0

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/14/11222482/bernie-sanders-free-college

There's a big problem with Bernie Sanders's free college plan

[seabeckind]

154. Oh cute... a Gish Gallop.

So retirement funds that are long term, minimal transactions, would be hurt by a transaction tax?

Looks more to me that the wall street folks are spinning.

Enjoy your day.

[Sancho]

156. No..it makes a big difference according to accountants.

Thousands for each retiree. That's why we looked into the details.

[seabeckind]

157. BS. n/t

[Sancho]

161. That was just ONE issue too...Bernie had lots of other poor proposals.

If you study his plans in depth, he has a lot of problems.

Free tuition was just the example I gave you...there are others.

Careful analysis reveals how hard it is to create policy by the seat of your pants.

[seabeckind]

164. Ok, I'll try again.

The "study" you reference is from strictly an investors standpoint. And those investors are the very ones who profit so much from the status quo. They like doing lots of trades and using their trading paradigm to make them money. They make money from money.

They don't care if your kid has to go into debt for 30 years to pay off his debt. They don't care if you are the one who has to cover his expenses until he can get on his feet.

The benefits from an affordable education are intangible. They can't be measured in monetary terms.

IOW, an accountant can't do it cause they don't have a column for it.

The only thing missing from your argument is the one where they say that an education isn't worth it.

it's 3rd way bullshit.

[Sancho]

168. That's not true...

we had union educators (some professors of accounting and business lawyers) who examined the FTT proposal.

Most states (like Florida where I am) have hundreds of millions in public retirement funds. They invest and trade daily like the 1%. An FTT would cost the average employee thousands over 30 years of contributions, and that would mean less salary or else less benefits.

Meanwhile, Forbes published an article already about how the wealthy could avoid paying the FTT, so the tax would end up being paid by the middle class!!

States control tuition. They would simply raise tuition to siphon off Bernie's payout by supporting colleges at a lower level. Finally, they would make the premiere schools (like UF which is 95% white, wealthy now) admissions friendly to the rich whose kids would go there - while the middle class and minority would be regulated to community colleges, paying "fees" and getting a second rate education. The premier schools would also not ADMIT undocumented students for example.

EQUAL EDUCATION is the goal. Not just a free ride for the already wealthy.

Has nothing to do with the third way.

[brooklynite]

173. The very label is disengenuous..

"Wall Street" = "ban"

"Speculation" = "bad"

Bottom line, the message is that financial investments are bad for the nation and irresponsible behavior for the individual or union pension fund making them.

[larkrake]

128. they forget with anti bernie hate and trip over the line

or they are 3rd way robots

[Agnosticsherbet]

54. I doubt that they are out to acquire a dose of Trump...

[enid602]

58. hard sell?

It's not that Hill is a hard sell as much as Bernie is an easy one. He knew millenials have very limited political memories, and would buy his promises unquestioningly.

[Rose Siding]

59. No worries. She'll get 'em

[azmom]

65. "We're building our campaign a different way"

Just wow.

[Marr]

75. A radically different way.

Hillary takes mammoth checks from billionaires who’ll get their custom-fit trade and foreign policy if she becomes president. Trump only offers tax cuts. That's so 1980's.

[RBInMaine]

69. And how hard a sell is FrankenTrump?

[Lucinda]

73. Nonsense. n/t

[LoverOfLiberty]

77. Yawn

The primaries are officially over.

[Walk away]

79. Then they will have to buy The Donald! It's their future.

[Demsrule86]

80. There are six millenial voters in my family

All will vote for Hillary in the fall...five supported Sanders, the sixth like them both...they are not stupid and understand the risk Trump poses...and the girls like Hillary Clinton and are excited for the first woman president...my son says he likes her now after listening to her two speeches...one about foreign policy and one on Monday...so I think there are many out there who will vote for Hillary and many of the BOB types inflate their importance...as does Bernie who is rapidly reaching legend in his own mind status with his refusal to acknowledge he lost. Truly this is awful behavior Bernie.

[larkrake]

129. millennials have not lived through years of her crap yet, but they will find out

[Joe the Revelator]

84. Not when the other display case only has Trump in it.

People, with a brain, just aren't going to vote for Trump. I've convinced myself of that after this week.

[Shemp Howard]

88. Tell the Millennials to sit down and shut up.

It's time for a woman president. Plus, it's Hillary's turn. Plus, the more wars the better. The Millennials are too stupid to understand any of that.

[Gman]

93. I have to wonde about anyone that has to be sold on HRC

when the alternative is Trump. Seriously, what is so hard to understand. Voting for HRC is pretty much a no brained. I think millennials are much sharper than this.

[Lil Missy]

94. You mean the ones that have all the time in the world for rallies but none for voting? n/t

[Buzz cook]

95. I disagree

Clinton in her latest speeches has hit every right note and her delivery is excellent.

Clinton's problem is getting her message out not the quality of that message.

Millennials can be reached by reason and logic just like any other group. But they can't be reached if they never hear the message.

[w4rma]

108. Why listen to Hillary's speeches? She rarely says anything substantial in them.

And when she does say anything substantial, it's often by accident and she is likely to retract whatever it was the next day.

[Buzz cook]

124. It seems like you haven't nt

nt

[w4rma]

125. I have. I stopped because she wasn't telling me substantive information. (nt)

[larkrake]

130. She doesn't say anything. I still dont know her policies, they seem to change

to fit the audience, well lets see if she can fool all the people all the time. The drawback is she does not have a poker face. It goes weird when she panders, and that voice makes me cringe. The lies flow, but the hesitations and evasions are so obvious.

She will be an interesting pres. A case study for the books

[w4rma]

172. Me neither. My expectation is Clinton is telling her donors the truth while lying to the public.

I'll gladly listen to every word of every one of her Goldman Sachs speeches and her other paid speeches to banks.

[oasis]

99. If Hillary makes any concessions to Bernie for the youth vote

he damn well better deliver.

[WolverineDG]

119. She wants the job, it's HER responsibility to reach out

to those voters who didn't vote for her in the primary.

[oasis]

120. If she's gotta reach out, why the hell make any concessions to Bernie?

He'd better get off of his behind and start hitting the bricks.

[larkrake]

131. that is what reaching out is-duh

[larkrake]

132. forget it, he has a revolution to run and a republican to dis-embowel

its her job to win over bernie folk. only concessions will do that- not her sparkling personallity

[WolverineDG]

190. It's called "politicking" for a reason

you want people to vote for you, you reach out to them & give them reasons why. I know, shocking, huh?

[oasis]

192. Bernie had better make himself useful. He's already pushing

it with his unrealistic laundry list of demands.

[uponit7771]

220. +1

[Live and Learn]

107. And to anyone that's been paying attention to her policies. nt

[brooklynite]

117. It's Wednesday!

[williesgirl]

118. She's a hard sell to this 70 year old!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

121. Well we all have to grow up at some point and realize we can't get what we want

It's adulting and my generation and those younger than me can do it

[larkrake]

134. wrong, it never pays to Settle. you go ahead tho

[La Lioness Priyanka]

169. lol ok

[Beacool]

122. Well, it's their choice.

A Trump presidency would affect them adversely far more than people who are older and settled in their careers and life.

They can do whatever they want, but if they care about their future, it would behoove them to help to prevent Trump from becoming president.

[Justice]

136. How much of Bernie's appeal to young people was about helping with college debt?

I think the media has under-reported on this link. Young people loved Bernie in part because he told them he would erase their college debt.

[seabeckind]

145. How about college price gouging?

The problem as I see it is that there are so many who have no idea just what the college expense is.

The educational system has become a monstrous unregulated profit-oriented entity. You might complain about Trump U but it is just a more obvious example of what is going on.

Like textbook kickbacks, deliberate obsolescence of a book. Fees for a benefit which the student might never use.

It's a captive audience.

It is exactly like the situation in the healthcare industry. And every other corporate controlled system in this country.

You like paying 10 times more for internet than other countries? Did you ever wonder why that is?

Complex topic.

[MFM008]

138. look at the time.............

Its June 15th. Time does fly.

[Hekate]

139. Still YELLING at us I see. Thanks for your INPUT.

[Vattel]

140. She's a hard sell to anyone who is not a hawk.

[MrMickeysMom]

144. and generation X, and boomers, and geezers....

Let's face it... unless you've had your attitude shaped by corporate media, you're gonna have issues being held down and force fed what we all read about in 1984.

[vintx]

214. THIS

[Gothmog]

148. Poll of millennial voters shows clear shift toward Democrats, away from Trump

Even if Sanders refuses to endorse and support Clinton, she will still beat Trump with millennial voters http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-millennial-poll-20160425-story.html

Republicans long have worried about how to survive as conservative GOP voters die off and are replaced by more liberal younger Americans.

A new national poll of millennial voters suggests that the 2016 presidential race has only hastened the shift they have feared.

The preference of voters younger than 30 for a Democrat over a Republican as the November victor nearly doubled in the last year as the presidential campaign grew in prominence, according to the survey by Harvard’s Institute of Politics.

Currently 61% prefer a Democrat in the White House, and 33% favor a Republican, the poll found. In a similar survey released last spring, the gap between the two parties was only 15 percentage points.

Republican front-runner Donald Trump was far and away the least popular candidate among those polled. Overall, only 17% of millennials had a favorable view of him, and 6 in 10 said they had a "very unfavorable" view of him. Just under a quarter had a favorable view of the other two Republican candidates, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

Among Republicans, Trump was seen negatively by 57%. Only 1 in 3 Republicans felt the same way about Cruz or Kasich.

Not surprising, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton swamped Trump among likely voters in a presidential matchup, 61% to 25%, despite her significant negative ratings.

Trump was losing to her in part because of a significant drop-off among young Republicans and those who had previously sided with the party’s politicians.

[beachbum bob]

155. life under a trump presidency will be a "hard reality" that doesn't go away

instead of hypothetical outrage of hillary....millennials will be living the outrage with trump and the impact may last generations with his supreme court nominations and a conservative congress


there is NO comparison to be made

[Fumesucker]

158. Why the hell do you think the media spent a year pumping Trump up with a billion in free advertising

[runaway hero]

162. i bet most millenials

will vote none of the above right now.

[BlueStater]

165. Pretty telling.

None of the HC supporters here can name a single reason why anyone should be inspired by her, just that she's better than her ignorant, racist, insane, egomaniacal opponent. Well, that's just fan-fucking-tastic. Richard Nixon is better than Adolf Hitler. I feel so much better now.

[book_worm]

167. Not really I think two-thirds of them will vote for her.

[Darb]

177. Oooh, an "I won't vote" threat.

Don't. WGAS?

[felix_numinous]

185. Yes using sales jargon is appropriate

for the corporatization of the government, citizens are considered consumers if we are lucky enough to have funds, if not we are personae non grata.

[Go Vols]

209. +1

[pinebox]

187. Truth is Hillary is a hard sell to most of America

[MichiganVote]

200. Until sensible people imagine a Prez Trump.

[bvf]

205. Sensible people never wanted Clinton as the nominee.

https://m.

[RufusTFirefly]

215. Reminds me of the propaganda leading up to the illegal Iraq invasion

Corporate media shoved it down our throats and deliberately marginalized or silenced voices with a contrary point of view.

Many of us who focused on issues and facts instead of fears and regurgitated talking points took to the streets and to the web in the hopes of being heard.

But we were ridiculed, ignored, and accused of somehow being disloyal.

Then, once nearly everyone realized, as we long had warned, that the decision was a colossal mistake, we were told, "But we can't just cut and run!"

[pinebox]

210. Wrong. Most see them both as snake oil salesmen

[vintx]

211. This is going to be one long nightmare of an election season.

After the way the DNC has handled this primary process, they'll be lucky to maintain the paltry 29% of the electorate which they now desperately hope to be able to count on.

[Fla Dem]

216. Great hit piece by RW Republican and a Libertarian

Heather R Higgins

George magazine published an article in its 1995 first issue, entitled "The Heather Report," in which Higgins' views were summarized as "essentially libertarian," and in agreement with the idea that "Centralized government will matter less and less.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Higgins

Carrie Lukas

Carrie L. Lukas is the Managing Director of Independent Women's Forum and Vice President of Policy and Economics at Independent Women's Voice. Lukas is the co-author of Liberty is No War on Women: How Big Government and Victim-Politics Undermine America's Progress and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism, which was published by Regnery Publishing in May 2006. She is also a contributor to National Review Online and a senior fellow at the Goldwater Institute.

Lukas appears frequently on television and the radio, on shows such as Fox News Channel's Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox Report with Shepard Smith, The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity and Colmes, CNBC's Kudlow and Company, and MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews. Lukas's commentaries have appeared in numerous newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, USA Today, the New York Post, Atlanta Journal Constitution, the Arizona Republic, the San Francisco Chronicle, and the Baltimore Sun.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carrie-lukas/