If the Biden campaign has any sense they’ll do what the Tories did in the UK and severely limit the scrutiny given to Biden. I honestly don’t think it’s coincidental that he does well in the states with zero ground game because the less exposure he faces, the better for his campaign.
They’ve been doing that already. I’ll edit when I find the article (I think it’s NYT?).
Guess i’m a Bernard Brother by default now.
With regards to the current news cycle speculations, we’d like to remind everyone to observe Rule 1 during discussion and avoid flippant or derivative comments about the mental state of any candidates or their supporters.
Bernie’s turnout thing just… didn’t work at all. Does give credence to people who don’t think he has a chance in a general election to turn out the voters he would really need. I myself don’t think Biden is a good shout to win, but it’s feeling to me like the Dems are already screwed no matter who wins.
The article failed to mention how broken a lot of polling places were, especially to first time voters. Look up the shenanigans that went down in Texas. It’s hard to get the youth to turn out when the ones trying to just get denied for seemingly no reason or are forced to wait for seven hours in line because the people planning all this failed to consider turn out, and the volunteers there aren’t trained to handle the ridiculous amount of restrictions and rules we have to deal with now.
Like you could have your proper voter registry card and that still wouldn’t be enough in some places.
Voter suppression is a big problem, but it isn’t enough, in my mind, to explain a lower percentage of voters being young almost everywhere.
Iowa has caucuses, but turnout was still lower. Vermont is Bernie’s home state and a liberal bastion, youth turnout was still lower. Massachussets as well. We’re comparing to 2016 numbers. I don’t know the specifics, but I would doubt that it’s somehow gotten harder to vote in those states since 2016. The people he was supposed to bring out just straight up haven’t come to the polls in the numbers he bet on himself achieving.
It actually has gotten harder to vote.
Down here in Texas, for instance, active polling stations have been cut significantly, which caused the majority of the back up. The infrastructure is fundamentally broken and getting worse, as we saw with the Iowa disaster’s app obsession.
And I’d argue the lower youth turn out over all is more from watching the nonsense that is this entire primary, the vocal threats of the superdelegates, and just generally watching what the democratic leadership has been doing. The faith in the Democratic party has never been lower and deservedly so.
I believe you about Texas, but one of the points I was trying to make is the turnout is down in places where voter suppression isn’t as rampant, too.
W/r/t people having low faith in the Democratic party - I think that theoretically should be almost a selling point for Sanders - let’s get these old fucks out.
I don’t have a solution for this problem. My baseline is that Sanders staked his campaign on getting young people out to vote. There are definitely systemic problems in the way, although he also maybe should have been aware of them. I think it is at least partially his campaign’s fault that they didn’t get youth out / staked his candidacy on something they couldn’t make happen.
in washington state, it’s so easy to vote. if you’re a registered voter, you get a ballot in the mail, and you can just drop it back off in the mailbox, no stamp required, or at a ballot box, and where I live they’re all over the place. I understand what a liberal state I live in so they’ve made it “easier.” for people. imagine if everyone was automatically registered and voting took place on a Saturday, or was as easy as everyone getting a mailer. idk what I’m trying to say. we make it hard to vote in this country.
This is also a problem outside the US as well, though our voter suppression and politics are definitely to blame for the degree of low turnout in the States. Young people in a lot of democratic countries don’t vote in the numbers we really need them to right now, and I’m not sure what the solution is either.
We need structural change and I’d say low voter turnout is nothing for smug MSNBC types to cheer about. It tells you that the party is still failing to get the message out, that there’s severe structural problems impeding the party’s message, and voting still needs a ton of reform. People shouldn’t be staying home, I don’t care who wins. Their voice doesn’t disappear if it isn’t heard, this is still a democracy, and you can’t decide that some groups don’t matter.
I would make voting mandatory. Opt out not opt in. Only way to fix this. Cause you can’t pretend it isn’t a problem.
Mandatory voting is kind of like term limits: it’s the last step in a long journey of change. Need vote-by-mail and a whole month of voting (and probably ranked-choice, money out of politics, get rid of the Electoral College, non-partisan redistricting, etc.) first. If you’re going to penalize people for not voting, you need to make voting fall-off-a-log easy (and enticing!) first.
I dunno about penalizing, but certainly keeping the polls open until most people who can vote do vote is what we need to do. One day elections on a fucking Tuesday are not what fixes politics.
Oh, maybe I misinterpreted your intention here. Australia has “mandatory voting” in that it’s literally illegal to not vote (I think the penalty is a fine). I thought that’s what you meant, and I’m not thrilled with the idea of mandatory voting in that respect just yet.
The main silver lining of the past week is that everyone save for the two primary frontrunners have dropped out, so potential voters can get a clearer image of what each candidate represents without all the noise of self-interested busybodies like Buttigieg or Bloomberg.
Also, primaries are mainly the domain of the politically engaged, whereas general elections involve a lot more spontaneity from potential voters. Obama did exceptionally well from having a consistent campaign messaging, whereas Hillary couldn’t offer anyone a definable vision for the future beyond more of the same.
So in that respect, I wouldn’t take primary turnouts to be too indicative of the general election. What matters is electing a candidate who has an actual campaign pitch, rather than another beltway ghoul who will get completely thrown for a loop by Trump’s usual soundbite slogans.
Also, the barriers to young voters that existed for the primary aren’t going to go away in the general election, which is a really bad sign for Sanders’ chances against Trump even if he manages to beat Biden.
I think Sanders’ theory of change is fundamentally correct in the sense that there’s a lot more to change than electoral politics at the presidential level. But Sanders is trying to do electoral politics at the presidential level anyway, and it turns out that he’s not great at it.
HEY, this is Tulsi erasure and I won’t stand for it