You’re right, Clinton is a great candidate, nay, the best candidate the DNC could possibly have put forth, and her campaign is going very well right now. Sorry for questioning everyone’s superior wisdom.
And who would enact much of the agenda they support.
And who is not the single most dangerous mainstream political candidate in… I want to say the last century.
And who is a legitimate liberal, and not a hardline conservative blowhard.
And who would prevent the achievements of the last 8 years from slipping away.
And who is not dangerously incompetent
And who actually stands a goddamn chance of winning against the former.
People need to stop framing this as though, “You can’t tell us how to vote, Dad!” was somehow a rational or reasonable response. It’s not. We’re not asking these people to vote for some impossible candidate. We’re asking for some basic self-interest combined with a wee bit of fucking sense. If there were no third parties, Clinton would unarguably and without any possible counterargument be a better candidate for these people than Trump. Third parties have absolutely no chance in hell of winning, so we might as well not have them. At best, these people are terminally deluded about the chances of their pet candidate (who in one case isn’t even on the ballot in every fucking state!) of winning; at worst, they are willing to cast a “protest vote” that could potentially lead to Donald “why don’t we give US treasury bonds a haircut” Trump becoming president - and they understand how bad that would be.
At worst, idiots.
At best, complete fucking assholes.
This needs to be on a T-shirt!
It’s becoming their world. If they honestly think Trump is the better candidate, then they’ll vote for him. And have to live with that decision. And if Trump wins, may (…) have mercy on them.
Such rage. And you wonder why people are turned off to your message.
Pfffft. The Bernie crowd was *far *more negative throughout the primaries than Hillary supporters were. And we are now reaping the result of that negativity among the '90s babies who took it all in.
That analogy makes no sense at all. You’re complaining about the darned kids today not voting enough for your preferred candidate, despite the fact that, organized by age, they’re voting for the candidate more than other age groups. A better analogy would be that you’re angry at your best player for not being even better, while ignoring the shitty players.
Your OP is, well, just an old person complaining the kids today aren’t good enough.
I totally agree. Posts like the OP are ill-considered and come across as super-entitled. They do Clinton very little good.
And I still hope that you’ll vote for her. Votes should, I think, be cast according to what vote will nudge the world in the better direction. The best way to minimize the chance of a Trump presidency is to vote for Clinton, and the lack of a Trump presidency is the best possible outcome at this point, eclipsing all other possible outcomes. Any other choice increases the chance of a Trump presidency, the worst possible outcome by far.
Sneer at, chew out, flip the bird at people who get all petulant about millennials, that’s fine. But when you’re done, please help minimize the chance of Trump winning.
FYI, my wife is a Millennial, albeit one born in the '80s rather than the '90s.
Of course it makes sense. Those people who are voting for Trump aren’t on my team. They don’t want Hillary to win. So they aren’t disappointing or betraying me.
More like my best receiver sat out the game because he was mad that the coach wasn’t drawing up enough plays for him. And there are prima donna receivers like that, and I would be mad at him if he did that, and I wouldn’t be mad at the receiver who had to fill in for him off the bench who just doesn’t have the speed or agility, through no fault of his own.
I would have thought this would go without saying, but you do understand I’m not mad at the 18-25 year olds who are still “go for launch” in terms of voting for Hillary? I’m mad at a specific segment who love Obama, would vote for many other Democrats (not just Bernie, I don’t think), but who are, as someone said upthread, “cutting off their noses to spite their faces” by refusing to support Hillary. But that’s too long to fit in a subject line, and I thought it was kind of obvious.
Coincidentally, 538 just came out with a story on this subject this morning:
The headline is about black Millennials, and how they are far less likely to vote for Hillary than their parents are. But if you look through the data, it turns out that only 28 percent of whites 18-30 (there they go, cutting off thirtysomething Millennials like I’ve been complaining about) say they plan to vote for Hillary–less than the percentage of whites *over *thirty who support her! So those of you saying things like “they are the most likely to vote for Clinton and not Trump”, you might want to rethink your stance.
The problem is that you see this as a team sport. It ain’t, and that’s a terribly misleading way to view politics.
Old people have a completely different outlook; it’s normal for them to vote “conservative.” Young people have a long future to look forward to; oldsters, to oversimplify only slightly, just don’t want anything interfering with their cash-check/buy-meds cycle.
Even though it would now disenfranchise me, I’d advocate a maximum age for voting rights! Electoral results just don’t affect oldsters as much as they do those with a long future ahead.
I’m sure some Millenials support Gary Johnson or David Duke or whoever, but the Bernie Bums and those OP is speaking of want stronger government, not less government.
As for the black Millennials profiled in the story:
Sigh.
You’re saying it ain’t don’t make it not. People who have participated in party politics, union organizing, environmental activism, etc. would likely disagree with you. But I guess you see it more like consumerism: just individual voters making decisions, with the help of marketing.
Your guess here is as bad as your grammar here :).
Since they are actually both very good, I’ll take that as a compliment.
So let me get this straight; if someone isn’t on your team, you don’t criticize them, but if they’re a “millennial” they’re automatically on your team? What are the teams, again?
Maximum age for voter rights is a pretty damn nutty idea.
As I said somewhere else, the Boomers have GRANDCHILDREN and care more about the future than they/we ever did when they/we were the age of the millennials. The motto of our generation was, “Don’t trust anyone over 30.” Yeah, really. Young people of all eras have a long future, but they don’t think of or plan for the future.
While I have no doubt people who are old enough to have grandchildren have more grandchildren than they did when they were 25, that does not prove they vote in the interests of their grandchildren at their own expense.
The majority of climate-change deniers are over 50. So, I’m not so sure it’s the youngsters who don’t think or care about the future.