Exclusive: Democrats lose ground with millennials - Reuters/Ipsos poll

trippnface

trippnface

Well-Known Member
"The online survey of more than 16,000 registered voters ages 18 to 34 shows their support for Democrats over Republicans for Congress slipped by about 9 percentage points over the past two years, to 46 percent overall. And they increasingly say the Republican Party is a better steward of the economy.

Although nearly two of three young voters polled said they do not like Republican President Donald Trump, their distaste for him does not necessarily extend to all Republicans or translate directly into votes for Democratic congressional candidates."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-millennials/democrats-lose-ground-with-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1I10YH

You guys are going to need a better strategy then " TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP"

Millennials are not interested in the DNC.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
trippnface said:
"The online survey of more than 16,000 registered voters ages 18 to 34 shows their support for Democrats over Republicans for Congress slipped by about 9 percentage points over the past two years, to 46 percent overall. And they increasingly say the Republican Party is a better steward of the economy.

Although nearly two of three young voters polled said they do not like Republican President Donald Trump, their distaste for him does not necessarily extend to all Republicans or translate directly into votes for Democratic congressional candidates."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-millennials/democrats-lose-ground-with-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1I10YH

You guys are going to need a better strategy then " TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP"

Millennials are not interested in the DNC.
Click to expand...
I know you can't understand this but the Democratic strategy to win back the House is not Trump, Trump, Trump. The strategy is to focus on local issues and universally appealing Democratic party values which include support for unions, union pensioners, clean environment, civil rights for all, workers rights, US competitiveness, universal access to healthcare.

Your interpretation that "millenials aren't interested in DNC" is only revealing in how badly you understand statistics.

Millennials are thinking over the subject, as they should. To say millenials aren't interested in DNC, however, is false. The gap that grew between 2016 to 2018 (as revealed in the poll) isn't from Democrat to Republican, it's from 55% who voted for Democrats down to 46% in favor of Democrats and about 10% increase in those who are unsure. There was almost no growth in support for Republicans.

That said, it was an opinion poll. Opinion polls are terrible at predicting what will happen when people vote. The only poll that matters is an election poll.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I know you can't understand this but the Democratic strategy to win back the House is not Trump, Trump, Trump. The strategy is to focus on local issues and universally appealing Democratic party values which include support for unions, union pensioners, clean environment, civil rights for all, workers rights, US competitiveness, universal access to healthcare.

Your interpretation that "millenials aren't interested in DNC" is only revealing in how badly you understand statistics.

Millennials are thinking over the subject, as they should. To say millenials aren't interested in DNC, however, is false. The gap that grew between 2016 to 2018 (as revealed in the poll) isn't from Democrat to Republican, it's from 55% who voted for Democrats down to 46% in favor of Democrats and about 10% increase in those who are unsure. There was almost no growth in support for Republicans.

That said, it was an opinion poll. Opinion polls are terrible at predicting what will happen when people vote. The only poll that matters is an election poll.
Click to expand...
You mean win back the House with pre-selected and financed primary candidates by DNCCC?

Ahhh the stench of fascism in the air.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
You mean win back the House with pre-selected and financed primary candidates by DNCCC?

Ahhh the stench of fascism in the air.
Click to expand...
Are you going to vote Republican?

I think you are whining about a baby politician in Colorado who was told by an experienced one that he wasn't the best candidate and the DCCC wouldn't be giving him their help. He can run for the job. There is nothing to stop him.

Only a year ago, you members of the Cult of Sanders said that taking money and help from the DCCC was going to hurt a candidate's chances. Now you are crying about how the DCCC is focusing on the candidates they think are best and not giving an equal share to all comers.

I know you can't understand this but running for office isn't the same as a attending a kid's soccer clinic. Just showing up entitles the kids to a participation trophy. Not so in real politics. It's time to grow up, child.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
It was going to be pretty hard for the Dems to gain ground due to the fact that so few supported the Republicans to begin with.

This was a big achievement for Trump who has nearly assured his re-election.

Go to sleep. Go to sleeeeeep.

 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Are you going to vote Republican?

I think you are whining about a baby politician in Colorado who was told by an experienced one that he wasn't the best candidate and the DCCC wouldn't be giving him their help. He can run for the job. There is nothing to stop him.

Only a year ago, you members of the Cult of Sanders said that taking money and help from the DCCC was going to hurt a candidate's chances. Now you are crying about how the DCCC is focusing on the candidates they think are best and not giving an equal share to all comers.

I know you can't understand this but running for office isn't the same as a attending a kid's soccer clinic. Just showing up entitles the kids to a participation trophy. Not so in real politics. It's time to grow up, child.
Click to expand...
Amazingly, these fools think that the right way to face to Republicans is be turning down large donations. But now they say the reason Progressives (a very different thing from Democrats who support progressive legislature) aren't ending up on the ballot in November is because they aren't getting sizeable financial support and face opponents who are

These people are not good at logic.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Millennial's are much more politically savvy than previous generations, this is largely because they've had widespread access to the internet, a very useful tool. Had Gen X, or Boomers been afforded such a luxury, the title of this poll would be very different. That said, it wouldn't be a surprise to discover millennials are abandoning our established two party system in favor of a more representative form of democracy. Millennial's can see the disconnect from what the voters want and what the parties and politicians actually advocate for.

Look at history. Why does a party generally tend to stay in power for a long period of time? Generally speaking, because said party represents the people casting their votes in a way they approve of. FDR earned 4 terms because voters supported his platform. Republicans had to enact a Constitutional amendment to force Democrats out of office because their policies were so popular among the American people during the Depression and into the 1950s.

Democrats have lost a lot of ground currently because they've abandoned those working class policy positions that voters were enthusiastic about casting their votes for in favor of big business, corporate votes, because that's what makes them rich, under the guise that corporations votes are what turn the tides of elections, having lost more than 1K seats under said strategy in less than 8 years...
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Are you going to vote Republican?

I think you are whining about a baby politician in Colorado who was told by an experienced one that he wasn't the best candidate and the DCCC wouldn't be giving him their help. He can run for the job. There is nothing to stop him.

Only a year ago, you members of the Cult of Sanders said that taking money and help from the DCCC was going to hurt a candidate's chances. Now you are crying about how the DCCC is focusing on the candidates they think are best and not giving an equal share to all comers.

I know you can't understand this but running for office isn't the same as a attending a kid's soccer clinic. Just showing up entitles the kids to a participation trophy. Not so in real politics. It's time to grow up, child.
Click to expand...
You're actually defending the systematic manipulation of the democratic process.

That you are this easy to fool isn't surprising, but it is pathetic.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Amazingly, these fools think that the right way to face to Republicans is be turning down large donations. But now they say the reason Progressives (a very different thing from Democrats who support progressive legislature) aren't ending up on the ballot in November is because they aren't getting sizeable financial support and face opponents who are

These people are not good at logic.
Click to expand...
Right. Because accepting large donations is soooooo democratic.

I wouldn't be mocking anyone else's grasp of logic if I were you.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Millennial's are much more politically savvy than previous generations, this is largely because they've had widespread access to the internet, a very useful tool. Had Gen X, or Boomers been afforded such a luxury, the title of this poll would be very different. That said, it wouldn't be a surprise to discover millennials are abandoning our established two party system in favor of a more representative form of democracy. Millennial's can see the disconnect from what the voters want and what the parties and politicians actually advocate for.

Look at history. Why does a party generally tend to stay in power for a long period of time? Generally speaking, because said party represents the people casting their votes in a way they approve of. FDR earned 4 terms because voters supported his platform. Republicans had to enact a Constitutional amendment to force Democrats out of office because their policies were so popular among the American people during the Depression and into the 1950s.

Democrats have lost a lot of ground currently because they've abandoned those working class policy positions that voters were enthusiastic about casting their votes for in favor of big business, corporate votes, because that's what makes them rich, under the guise that corporations votes are what turn the tides of elections, having lost more than 1K seats under said strategy in less than 8 years...
Click to expand...
Careful, your logic is showing.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
You're actually defending the systematic manipulation of the democratic process.

That you are this easy to fool isn't surprising, but it is pathetic.
Click to expand...
Experienced politicians are deciding how the DCCC is going to spend its money. It's a non-governmental arm of the Democratic Party and it's charter is to help get Democrats elected.

You are whining about a baby politician who was told by an experienced politician that in his opinion, he isn't the best candidate for the job and the DCCC is focusing on politicians they think can win. This is completely within the written charter of that organization. It's up to the baby politician to prove them wrong and I'd be glad if he did.

Just last year, you and Pad were telling us that by rejecting campaign donations and aid from "the establishment" candidates were going to enhance their chances of winning. It seems you should have spelled it whinging.

So, baby politician, instead of crying like a bitch, how about asking what he can do so that he's better prepared next time?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Experienced politicians are deciding how the DCCC is going to spend its money. It's a non-governmental arm of the Democratic Party and it's charter is to help get Democrats elected.

You are whining about a baby politician who was told by an experienced politician that in his opinion, he isn't the best candidate for the job and the DCCC is focusing on politicians they think can win. This is completely within the written charter of that organization. It's up to the baby politician to prove them wrong and I'd be glad if he did.

Just last year, you and Pad were telling us that by rejecting campaign donations and aid from "the establishment" candidates were going to enhance their chances of winning. It seems you should have spelled it whinging.

So, baby politician, instead of crying like a bitch, how about asking what he can do so that he's better prepared next time?
Click to expand...
Much hot air, totally failing to obscure the fact that this is exactly what corruption looks like.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Much hot air, totally failing to obscure the fact that this is exactly what corruption looks like.
Click to expand...
Nope, Not corruption at all. Democrats are going to focus on who they think are the best candidates. They've said outright that they aren't going to give money to candidates they think are weak. They should and I think will be held accountable to results in November.

I've said all along that it is up to the candidate to persuade voters to vote for them. If your candidate is so good, he should focus on winning votes, not whining about politicians that he disagrees with. If he's so good, why doesn't he take his case to the general public and beat the establishment by gaining confidence and donations from the people he wants to vote for him? Isnt that what "Our Revolution" and "Justice Democrats" are all about?

Are you ready to agree with me that now is not the time for all Democratic Party politicians to refuse legal campaign donations?
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Amazingly, these fools think that the right way to face to Republicans is be turning down large donations.
Click to expand...
...right so far, since in order for Democrats to win, their constituents need to actually believe they're representing their interests. Otherwise, they have no need to vote for them..

I get that that's a novel idea, and I see how some would believe that if the corporate Democrat still supports minority votes or LGBTQ votes, then he's obviously the lesser of two evils. No doubt about that, nobody I know would deny that. But that's not enough. And in choosing not to vote for that candidate, it doesn't make me racist, or sexist, or anything. It simply means that candidate didn't entice me enough for me to cast my vote for him/her. Candidates are not entitled to votes, they have to earn them by supporting what voters want. If they don't support what I want, then they won't earn my vote.
Unclebaldrick said:
But now they say the reason Progressives (a very different thing from Democrats who support progressive legislature) aren't ending up on the ballot in November is because they aren't getting sizeable financial support and face opponents who are

These people are not good at logic.
Click to expand...
That's not what we're saying. Why try to strawman the actual position?

We're saying that the DCCC is tipping the scales for the corporate Democrat, just like the DNC did with Hillary Clinton. This is happening across the country in every race where there is a significant progressive challenger. It's obvious at this point, that the organization as a whole, the DCCC, the DNC, the Democratic party establishment, are all adamantly fighting AGAINST any progressive challengers, even going so far as to post their support for REPUBLICANS against actual progressives.

As we've said before, the Democratic establishment would rather a Republican win than an actual progressive. This adds to that proof
 
Last edited:
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Experienced politicians are deciding how the DCCC is going to spend its money.
Click to expand...
What happened to "the voters should decide what they want for their state"?

That was your entire argument against Manchin in WV

Now you're saying the DCCC should decide the outcome of the elections..

So which is it? Should people of their state decide their representatives, or should corporate elites like the DNC and DCCC decide who runs the state?

Try to be consistent this time
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
As we've said before, the Democratic establishment would rather a Republican win than an actual progressive.
Click to expand...
Horse shit. You've been saying all along that candidates are more likely to win if they forego legal campaign contributions from corporations and PACs. Now you are insisting that the DCCC, which is a non-governmental entity and an arm of the Democratic Party should make up the difference for anybody who is running?

You are whining about the DCCC not offering their teat to anybody who wants to run. The DCCC are most clearly are saying they will focus resources on candidates they think are most likely to win. This is completely within their written charter. Their charter is to get as many Democrats elected as possible. They are doing exactly that and they are completely honest to those they think need to work harder in preparation for these contests.

It's up to your candidate to figure out how to win. Do it honestly and legally but win or go home. This isn't a soccer clinic where everybody is entitled to a trophy just for showing up.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
What happened to "the voters should decide what they want for their state"?

That was your entire argument against Manchin in WV

Now you're saying the DCCC should decide the outcome of the elections..

So which is it? Should people of their state decide their representatives, or should corporate elites like the DNC and DCCC decide who runs the state?

Try to be consistent this time
Click to expand...
"Now you're saying the DCCC should decide the outcome of the elections.." Strawman argument. I never said that.

The voters are going to vote. The decision is up to them. If your candidate is so good, then why can't he convince voters to vote for them? .
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
What happened to "the voters should decide what they want for their state"?

That was your entire argument against Manchin in WV

Now you're saying the DCCC should decide the outcome of the elections..

So which is it? Should people of their state decide their representatives, or should corporate elites like the DNC and DCCC decide who runs the state?

Try to be consistent this time
Click to expand...
But they're my TEAM! No matter how corrupt they are I HAVE to support them!

:spew:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top