VABills Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 One thing to remember on the youth movement is a large part of the movement will be college students. They would have to go back home for a day to vote, and possibly on a day when they have classes. They could mail in their vote, but I bet a large portion would not. It's different in getting them out to vote during primaries as they are home on summer break for the most part.
John Adams Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 You got to wonder how thoroughly the McCain camp was able to vet her considering that McCain only met in person once before the selection. At least with Romney, Lieberman, and Pawlenty McCain knew what he was getting. What we were getting was the same old stojan. Palin is not some tired bit of establishment--she has that same advantage as Obama
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 One thing to remember on the youth movement is a large part of the movement will be college students. They would have to go back home for a day to vote, and possibly on a day when they have classes. They could mail in their vote, but I bet a large portion would not. It's different in getting them out to vote during primaries as they are home on summer break for the most part. That is very true, and a good point, and one of the major reasons the youth vote doesn't often come out on election day. But this is also the very reason why I think this year is completely different. Because of the advent of text messaging and cell phones and Social Networks and email, etc, the college kids are not going to just go back to their classes and have to remember to go out and vote, or mail in their ballots, or go home, or have volunteers hope to catch them on their dorm phones to remind them to vote. The Obama organization is already taking care of all that. These guys are texting and emailing and posting on Facebook and all kinds of other things, remember we need to do this. It's one of the ways that Obama was able to beat Hilary and seemed to come out of nowhere. They tell them Do this. Do that. It's a completely different ballgame when you don't have to pay for that kind of awareness or walk door to door reminding people to get out and vote.
BillsNYC Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 Most of the "youth vote" don't actually care about the vote, they care more about being part of something and the "hippie party atmosphere"...I'll never forget the dolts in college for the 2000 election, most of them didn't even vote.
JK2000 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 One thing to remember on the youth movement is a large part of the movement will be college students. They would have to go back home for a day to vote, and possibly on a day when they have classes. They could mail in their vote, but I bet a large portion would not. It's different in getting them out to vote during primaries as they are home on summer break for the most part. Since when are most primaries in the summer?
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Wow, she really *IS* hot! Now there is a woman who knows how to use what God gave her. P.S. If you are man run away, run away. Succulent! ....Ah HA! EEW WEE, down boy.
Taro T Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 You got to wonder how thoroughly the McCain camp was able to vet her considering that McCain only met in person once before the selection. At least with Romney, Lieberman, and Pawlenty McCain knew what he was getting. IF they didn't vet her properly, then that would be one more similarity to the Souter nomination. They've had a few months to review this, how well McCain knows her isn't as critical as the staffers / hired investigators doing their job properly. I'd agree that McCain would have known what he was getting with Lieberman; the others, he'd be going off the work his staff did.
JK2000 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 IF they didn't vet her properly, then that would be one more similarity to the Souter nomination. They've had a few months to review this, how well McCain knows her isn't as critical as the staffers / hired investigators doing their job properly. I'd agree that McCain would have known what he was getting with Lieberman; the others, he'd be going off the work his staff did. Does anyone know exactly what the vetting process entails?
BillsNYC Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 Does anyone know exactly what the vetting process entails? Karl Rove was on yesterday when this was breaking and said its a lawyer who goes through all of your records and speeches, then meets with you and asks questions that you couldn't say on tv... I don't think its an enjoyable experience....
JK2000 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Karl Rove was on yesterday when this was breaking and said its a lawyer who goes through all of your records and speeches, then meets with you and asks questions that you couldn't say on tv... I don't think its an enjoyable experience.... I always pictured guys with dark suits and sunglasses showing up at all your ex's doorsteps and interrogating them.
Chilly Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 And it's often distorted because, like in 2004, the youth vote and energy was for Howard Dean. But he didn't turn out to be the candidate. Then they tried to transfer the excitement to the ticket, and to Kerry, who was the antithesis, and it not so surprisingly failed. The same thing with Gore. As the campaigning actually started, and people say that he was Al Bore, he lost all the enthusiasm. It's not just that, though. If you compare youth votes for the candidate that won the election in the primary and the general election, the turnout rates fall. As young people learn more about the candidates and watch the election, the turnout rate falls. IMO, the question isn't whether its going to drop, but how far. History also shows black guys can't win elections. This was actually something we looked at in one of my political psychology courses, and while it was considered a small impedence, the academic studies showed at least in the studies done around 2004, race wouldn't be all that big of a problem, which I think is one of the reasons why Obama decided to run this year. The studies also showed that being a Woman provided a much bigger barrier (again, though, not necessarily impossible to overcome). It also shows candidates raising literally half the money Obama has. Which is quite an accomplishment, certainly, but his donor profile doesn't look all that different from previous candidates. He's oing a great job extracting as much money as he can from them. It also shows candidates drawing nowhere near the crowds and enthusiasm he has. indeed. It also shows no one can put up offices in 50 states. I still don't think its a good idea. Obama aint gonna win Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc. Sure it's good to look at historical trends. I am not just trashing it. And yes, there is a concern that in previous elections, what Democrats hoped for or even predicted in the youth vote didn't materialize. But surely one can see that this year is a unique year, and what is happening is a groundswell (again, regardless of whether one believes he would make a good Prez or not). You obviously think differently, and that's cool. I think the possibility of it is rather large. Yep, it has some unique qualities to it, and you summed it up nicely - I don't think the differences are as large as you.
VABills Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Since when are most primaries in the summer? Half are may/june, when most college students are out. http://www.fec.gov/pages/2kdates.htm actually not as many this year. http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elec...ry_Calendar.htm
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 It's not just that, though. If you compare youth votes for the candidate that won the election in the primary and the general election, the turnout rates fall. As young people learn more about the candidates and watch the election, the turnout rate falls. IMO, the question isn't whether its going to drop, but how far. This was actually something we looked at in one of my political psychology courses, and while it was considered a small impedence, the academic studies showed at least in the studies done around 2004, race wouldn't be all that big of a problem, which I think is one of the reasons why Obama decided to run this year. The studies also showed that being a Woman provided a much bigger barrier (again, though, not necessarily impossible to overcome). Which is quite an accomplishment, certainly, but his donor profile doesn't look all that different from previous candidates. He's oing a great job extracting as much money as he can from them. indeed. I still don't think its a good idea. Obama aint gonna win Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc. Yep, it has some unique qualities to it, and you summed it up nicely - I don't think the differences are as large as you. Good post. I appreciate and enjoy the point-counterpoint you make, as usual. The only thing I will say is: 1. IMO, the more the youth vote learns about Obama, the more I think, overall, they will like him as opposed to, say, Gore and Kerry who were abysmal candidates. Some will fall off, as you say your personal experience shows. I have spoken to people who work in politics for a living, and not for the Democratic party or for Obama, and they say otherwise. And I think his convention could have only helped. It will be interesting to see. 2. I don't think there is any possible way to know the voting for a black guy issue. No matter what any figures are or any trends. I simply don't think a large portion of people would be honest about it, even to their families. And it goes both ways. I know a lot of white people who are voting for Obama just because he is black, but they wouldn't necessarily tell a person polling them that, it would make them look bad.
JK2000 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Half are may/june, when most college students are out. http://www.fec.gov/pages/2kdates.htm actually not as many this year. http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elec...ry_Calendar.htm About half the states held their primary on super tuesday and that was in March or Feb.
BillsNYC Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 Great article by Kirsten Powers (booyah) who is always on Hannity and Colmes and is on the liberal side most of the time, although not stubborn like the two hosts. I always like when she's on, she gives a fair Democratic point of view. http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/...6765.htm?page=2
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Great article by Kirsten Powers (booyah) who is always on Hannity and Colmes and is on the liberal side most of the time, although not stubborn like the two hosts. I always like when she's on, she gives a fair Democratic point of view. http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/...6765.htm?page=2 Yes that is the trap. Although given how right wing she is, it maybe easier to avoid then you think. However, I am still a guy, and Pailin would still be nice to whistle at. In a few decades, maybe centuries it will be interesting as we have folks from all different walks of life getting nominations if race and gender will still be part of the discuss, or will everyone just go back to the old boring policy wonk views of governing topics. Doubt it.
JK2000 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 2. I don't think there is any possible way to know the voting for a black guy issue. No matter what any figures are or any trends. I simply don't think a large portion of people would be honest about it, even to their families. And it goes both ways. I know a lot of white people who are voting for Obama just because he is black, but they wouldn't necessarily tell a person polling them that, it would make them look bad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Effect
buckeyemike Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Palin on Craig Ferguson "naughty librarian". Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 In the for-what-it's-worth-which-is-probably-not-much" department, this is fairly interesting... http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1003844485
SDS Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 In the for-what-it's-worth-which-is-probably-not-much" department, this is fairly interesting... http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1003844485 I would expect most reasonable, undecided people would have to take the intellectually honest "I don't have enough information" line before they can make any rational judgments on her effect of their vote.
Recommended Posts