No, here you are wrong. I agree swing voters in the 2024 presidential elections were not the sharpest tool in the shed, but even tho I am a lifelong Democrat, I voted for Schwarzenegger for Governor. Always voting a straight ticket without knowing the candidates or issue is also bad. I also sometimes dither on a couple CA propositions until it is time to vote, reading the Voter information packet and double checking it. Being undecided or swing is fine- sometimes.
The GOp hate propaganda machine will make sure any and all Dem candidates are hated by a substantial % of the population- the ones that wouldnt vote for them anyway. Hillary won the popular vote, do note.
She doesnt have enough experience. Nor does Mayor Pete.
Yes on the first half, but you are incorrect on the 2nd part.
Of course, everything else will not be equal. No Democrat that young will have a history where they won a race in a state or district that Trump won the same year.
But the longer you are in politics, the more of a record the opposition has to work with.
As for you being actually wiser as you age, that’s true of a few people. But defeating MAGA is, right now, too important to worry about something so debatable and uncertain and marginal.
One question in my mind is whether Mark Kelly is already too old. Also, you can be young and already have had time to generate a big target for oppo research. There is no ideal candidate.
I checked on google and some say it is “Generation Jones” and some say the start of X- most do say Boomer, yes.
Ai (take with a grain of salt) says " Yes, 1964 is generally considered the final year for the Baby Boomer generation (born 1946-1964), making someone born in 1964 a late Boomer, though they’re on the cusp and often share traits with Generation X (born 1965-1980). While official dates exist, individual experiences vary, with some 1964-born people identifying more as Gen X due to cultural shifts." and of course there is nothing official.
Eta: I brought the whole generations things into the discussion just to say I’m sick of the optics of nominating boomers. Let’s start backing some Xers for president. '65-'80.
While much of this is correct, I don’t think you can afford to give up on these voters. Galvanizing these voters is a lot of Trumps success and you can’ afford to just concede these voters, particularly if you ever want the type of majority where you can actually get things done. It is a tough problem though. Some are stupid yes, but others just hate politics, or are too busy, or are just disconnected from that world. There wants can be eclectic and often contradictory or impossible so it is usually not worth pandering to their specific causes, particularly they are unlikely to listen to what you say They aren’t going to watch debates or follow the news with any regularity.
That said I think having a plan and ability to connect to these voters is far more important than the race/sex/sexual orientation/experience/age of the candidate and even how progressive/moderate they are. You need to figure out how they consume information and utilize it talk to them. And while I agree focusing on economics is probably for the best, you do need to sound genuine when doing so, which is a huge problem with Democratic leadership who often seem to be spouting more focus group approved statements than actual sounding like real people. You need to actual make the people feel like their concerns are being listened and addressed.
Can Harris do this? I see no evidence of it thus far.
Can Kelly? Maybe. Talking on Maddow or Daily Show isn’t going to get to these voters though.
Can Buttigieg? Maybe. Fox News appearances might reach additional voters, though still not likely these low information voters.
I don’t think the rest of the stuff matters as much. Whether
I agree and I am also sick of nominating old people (like me). I just don’t like using arbitrary generational labels as if they have meaningful application to anything other than saying how old someone is.
I think there’s something to be said for age-related labels. For many young voters, Baby Boomers are their grandparents or even their great-grandparents, and they’re also the generation that’s been responsible for a lot of the problems they now see in the world. Even middle aged and older voters blame Baby Boom politicians for the mess we’re in.
Gen X is new and unproven. They’re the parents of millennials, just one Gen removed.
Even if it just comes down to marketing, a lot of presidential politics is marketing. If a candidate like Pritzker can claim Generation X, where someone like Kelly or Harris couldn’t, that matters imo.
Shapiro’s running for his second term, which I very much hope he wins. And Doug Mastranio (or whatever his name is) not trying for the Governorship again.
Agreed; I think the distinction is only relevant to people who insist on being pedantic about it.
The point that Harris (and Pritzker, etc.) are roughly 20 years (or more) younger than Trump and Biden (and a lot of senior Democratic leadership in the Senate, too) is the relevant point.