Am I the only one sad because a “serious” publication allows a headline with “meh” instead of apathetic?
You’re not alone, there are hundreds of Lemmy users who hold equally vocal opinions over details irrelevant to the point.
I certainly hope you are.
Seriousness is a plague.
It’s in quotes, so I think they made it clear they were quoting something the young people might say.
I don’t know if they’re right that the 18-35s use that word very often, but I think that’s what they’re going for.
30yo here, I usually only use it to answer questions where I’m apathetic about the choices
What are you feeling for dinner? Meh🤷
Do 18 y/o’s actually say that though? I think the journalist might be taking into the trap of trying to be relevant to kids by saying shit we said when we were kids.
This is why .ml had to ban its politics community
If they want to have a future, a lot more of them should get to feeling zero “meh” about voting for not donnie.
That’s a funny have hat you have. I’ve got a grey one I cut the label off. Refuse to be owned like that. You shouldn’t be owned by someone. Make your way free. It’s a fight. I tell you this with love.
Not sure I understand what you are saying here.
Young people don’t understand voter disenfranchisement, voter suppression, erosion of constitutional rights etc.
They just understand
They just showed the party what to do in order to get them excited to vote.
The party listened to their concerns, and they fell in line instantly. All the party has to do to get voter enthusiasm is to listen to the voters.
You don’t get enthusiasm by ignoring people’s concerns. That’s how you get apathy and resentment.
I’m sure it has a bit to do with voters being especially loud about this issue.
I know I wrote both my dem senators (Warren and Market), my dem rep, and my dem governor (Healey), asking them to support Biden resigning a couple days after the debate. And I’m probably not alone on that.
Yes, I get why the party did what it did. Still - voting for someone based solely on something like age and color, when the alternative is donnie, is exceedingly reckless.
Do you think that’s the reason? They’re more likely to vote because the party abandoned its all too usual “Here’s the candidate we like. Fuck you, you’re voting like we tell you to because you have no choice lol.” messaging.
Morale matters.
Do what the voters want and they’ll vote for you. Not the ass-backwards “vote in perfect lockstep for us forever no matter what we do, and maybe someday we’ll think about starting the process of evaluating giving tentative consideration to half a baby step towards something tangentially related to what you want, implemented over the course of 10 years” that was centrist conventional foolishness since at least 1992.
You could argue the same thing about Kamala. Maybe even more so, to be honest.
I wanted Biden to step aside as well, but mostly because of the optics and narrative about “Biden so old” and low information voters like this.
I mean, political donors pulling support of Biden after the debate did grease the wheels for that transition.
Yes, but look at what his exit accomplished. All the people who were saying that we should ignore the concerns of young people because they don’t vote? Welp, young people are getting excited to vote because their concerns have been heard and addressed.
Compare this to where they were when Biden was refusing to step down.
Yeah I’m sure the party that brought them in the situation they are in to begin with is their only hope for a future. It definitely represents them and their interests and not the billionaires, hence not addressing any of the real pressing issues in the world that the new generation cares about.
Does a word that is recognized in the dictionary need quotes?
Does a question about whether or not a word recognized by the dictionary needs quotes need to be asked?
Maybe it indicates that that is what those people would have said about voting previously
deleted by creator
Idk. Maybe. I think Biden has done a great job if you look at his policies, and I would have hoped people were excited about them. I take your comment to say that people are fooled into having more enthusiasm for a candidate with the same policies just becase a different face has been put on them. But there can be other reasons for the enthusiasm. For example, maybe people believe she will do a better job since she is younger and more energetic. And those people think a younger, more energetic candidate makes for a better President even while holding the same political views. If that gets people excited, fine. It may be from being fickle and fooled or may be from a realistic view of how leaders impact the group and how a younger leader could be better.
deleted by creator
When you called people fickle and easily fooled for choosing to vote for Harris, I assumed that’s because you dislike her and probably prefer another candidate, most likely Trump.
I’ve been wanting someone to explain to me the appeal of him because I find it a bit baffling. However, being separated from America both physically and culturally, I can only imagine I’m missing something.
deleted by creator
Then if you were to pick a side, who would you vote for? Even if you dislike both candidates and would rather neither, that is not a choice for Americans. It’s fine to say you’re a centrist but that doesn’t translate into the reality of a lot of politics, especially when it comes to government.
From my position, Harris looks like a more grounded and beneficial pick for their country, whereas Trump looks insane.
deleted by creator
Clearly YOU can’t
deleted by creator
Sorry who are you?
Ok Russian bot
If you support Trump can you explain to me why he’s good? Like policies and agendas etc.
I’m non-American and don’t vote based on things like entertainment and charisma because that seems unimportant to me when it comes to running a country, but that appears to be what the American people support?
I’m not joking, I legit don’t understand why he is popular or what he brings to the table that is worth the enthusiasm, besides being Republican.
deleted by creator
That’s because people are fickle and easily fooled.
The bold part.
deleted by creator
Less meh?
You mean they are showing less voter apathy
You mean they are showing less voter apathy
No, it means they are demonstrating a decrease in emotional detachment from the civil and democratic process of advocating for leadership.
emotional detachment from the civil and democratic process
Now I am curious how you define voter apathy
She should just pick Clooney as VP so we can be done with it already.
Keanu Reeves
It would be hard to attack Keanu without looking like a douche
That would just be unfair to the Republicans, so definitely the best choice
ACT 1, The GOP kills his puppy…
Amal Clooney, preferably. That lady is a major badass.
Though I think putting two women on the ticket would be a death knell unfortunately.
Mostly joking, I don’t think she’s an American citizen.
Though I think putting two women on the ticket would be a death knell unfortunately.
doubtful; harris/whitmer would be great; but whitmer has already ruled it out
Would be a great team, absolutely. But this is the United States. Getting one woman elected at that level is difficult enough. Unfortunately there are lots of people who would stay home if it’s an all-woman ticket.
Sucks but it’s true.
I hope she picks a good VP and not wet blanket like democratic establishment would want.
It appears she’s looking at people who could swing a purple state, so that probably won’t excite anyone hoping for a progressive ticket.
Almost as if you need to win before you can do anything at all.
Like it or not, the reality of the electoral college.
It’s so frustrating people don’t get this. Progressive politics is stringing together election victories. The US system is designed to require longer term horizons to enact significant change. And we saw precisely why when we survived Trump’s term.
You can win in multiple different ways, not simply picking a purple state moderate. The whole reason there’s a story about “more youth voters like Harris” is because more youth voters could help her win. And the youths notably live in every swing state.
Smoke and mirrors. Right now we need the clearest path to victory, not a path. The Right has their strengths and one of them is throwing wrenches into things. Can’t throw a stick into my spokes if my bike doesn’t have any.
And youths are also notorious for not turning out too.
And yet, they seem motivated to vote for Harris because the party stopped lecturing and listened instead.
I feel like i heard those same people say she was too moderate before.
Funny how that changes.
And yet they rallied behind her. Guess the centrist narrative about progressives wanting absolute perfection and purity testing everything to death was horseshit from the very beginning, and that progressives are willing to accept a reasonable compromise candidate when the party isn’t too stubborn and arrogant to listen.
Now since we’re talking about things people said before Biden dropped out, where’s all the chaos that Biden stans were predicting?
The youth are not historically known for showing up to vote.
And yet they’re excited right now because the party was responsive to their concerns.
Let’s hope they stay excited.
Let’s hope the party remains responsive, then.
There’s an increasing trend, though. The last couple elections have been pivotal. Sucks we didn’t turn out in 2016, but we’re learning. Young women telling young men you ain’t getting laid while abortion is illegal. LGBT+ saying you won’t take our healthcare. New parents saying we need universal childcare, college students saying debt forgiveness is essential.
I don’t know if it’ll be enough, but I know I’ll never miss an election again, at least
“The youth have notorious for low turnout. That’s why Kamala Harris (and possibly her VP) increasing their turnout isn’t important.”
More like being popular with a demographic who doesn’t show up to vote hasn’t historically been a good way to win elections.
If they actually show up this time, awesome.
Biden literally won in 2020 with strong youth turnout while Clinton lost in 2016 with a weak one. Historically, youth turnout is extremely important for Democrats, and people continually dismissing their value will only harm that effort.
https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/half-youth-voted-2020-11-point-increase-2016
That’s what the media says, but kids these days are showing up more than their parents were at their age.
I just hope it’s enough.
Tim waltz seems like a good pick. Seems to have a bit of the Bernie, no-bullshit, authenticity that plays well with independents.
Walz is a great governor. I don’t want to lose him as one, but I do think he’d be a great pick
We get Peggy Flanagan as a replacement. She rocks. Bonus points for getting a native American female governor as well
My preference is as follows:
-
Mark Kelly - Pros: Astronaut/Navy Combat Pilot; will pull veterans and people voting for novelty. He generally has moderate policies and won a national race in a battleground state. His Senate seat is safe because Gov. Hobbs (D) can appoint another Dem to fill it.
-
Pete Buttigieg - Also a veteran, oxford/rhodes scholar; one of the best debaters in D.C. Coming from a Cabinet position so does not risk any loss.
-
Whitmer - Contrary to some, I like the idea of doubling-down on women in this post-Roe, MeToo era. She brings a lot to the table, but she’s no longer in the running as she (a) both publicly and privately declined, and (b) she like Shapiro would be better off carrying their respective battleground states without either state feeling like they’ve been abandoned.
-
Jon Stewart - He won’t do it, but hear me out: Viral excitement; strong debater; cross-over appeal to veterans & first-responders thanks to his decades of helping them. The Zelenskyy of our nation. Counter lies and half-truths with satire and mockery.
I DON’T think Harris should pick Cooper, Beshear, Walz, or especially Newsom.
Mark Kelly was one of the people giving standing ovations and clapping away at Bibi’s speech to Congress. That really made my stomach churn.
It’s fucking so obvious that it boggles my mind that people are still gunning for him and buttigieg and shapiro. They are all power-hungry neoliberal freaks, I don’t understand how this is really in contention at this point. Basically the only thing she can do on the campaign trail is talk, and appoint a rather meaningless VP slot to show her allegiance to some kind of politics that actually gets people out and voting. If she chooses some moderate scumbag because they’re in a swing state, that’s like the fastest way for her to piss away all the good will she’s built up so far. It’s crazy, I don’t understand it.
… Ah yeah, that is kind of a bummer.
Mark Kelly looks good on paper, but his pro genocide and lukewarm stance towards unions is a wet blanket. Do people find him genuine?
People, no. Democratic bots, yes.
lol I love that I have both these accounts tagged as suss tankies.
Lol, I’m an anarchist.
Love when y’all tell on yourselves though.
Ah yes, how reassuring. Thanks, I’ll update my tag.
Mark Kelly is my favorite option too. If nothing else he is cool as hell and has that “great to have a beer with” quality. He’s also very white. None of these things should matter but he’s a great balancing choice for her presidency.
I like your list. I think Mark Kelly is the obvious best choice and I hope she lands on him. Novelty factor is strong, it would be foolish to underestimate the astronaut card. He balances the ticket well and might also help win Arizona.
Jon Stewart would be absolutely hilarious, though. If nothing else than for a potential VP debate with alleged couch fornicator Vance.
Damn I really want Jon Stewart to get into actual political office. He’s probably the most trusted voice out of anyone for my generation.
Bernie Stewart 2028! Or Stewart Colbert 2028?
AOC Stewart 2028
John Stewart would be history’s ultimate press secretary.
This is a good list.
Thank you for not including Shapiro and not risking a swing state getting a Republican governor
That guy has such an unfortunate name. I hear Shapiro and I immediately think of the right-wing pseudo-intellectual professional troll Ben Shapiro and wonder why the fuck would anybody want him on a ticket. I’m learning to not have such a visceral reaction to the name, but association is a bitch to overcome.
Mark Kelly is a great choice. Kamala needs someone who can win over the vets. Apparently Captain Bone Spurs still holds some sway with them.
Veterans are now a critical voting block for the Democrats? Not “young people” or “Hispanic voters”? Veterans?
I wouldn’t call them critical, no, but every vote matters. Especially in a demographic like former armed services. They represent a collective of voters across all 50 states and their voting trends are pretty unified in solidarity for candidates that recognize them and cater to their issues and interests. Sure, some are party hardliners and will vote D or R no matter what, that’s true of any homogeneous group of people.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/118684/military-veterans-ages-tend-republican.aspx
Every vote matters, but every voting bloc isn’t equally valuable to pursue. Whenever I’ve been on a military base with a TV running, there’s a 90%+ chance it’s playing Fox News. Trump called John McCain a loser for being captured and they voted for him anyway. If a veteran VP was going to turn the tides, there are already dynamics that would have a much greater impact.
Especially when he’s like the exact opposite of Benny boy. Maybe it would work in the opposite direction, though: People think it’s actually Ben Shapiro and vote for Harris because they think there’s some conspiracy to take over the presidency.
Honestly, I’d change my name.
Yeah I like all the battleground state governors, but I think for that reason, and for letting them continue to successfully run these states helps carry them. You also don’t want state residents to feel abandoned or used with them leaving for VP. They’re instrumental right where they are.
-
I think Tim Waltz would be a great pick. Full authenticity. A no nonsense and non flashy Midwestern white democrat from a rural district who lead a surprisingly progressive agenda. Count me in
Timmy has been a great governor for our state.
So great
If you felt “meh” about doing the utmost to avoid Trump, you might just be an idiot,
Young people are not renowned for their wisdom.
Neither are boomers, but we’ve spent the past 4 decades doing every last thing those shitheels want.
not really.
Then who have we been listening to? The party has been gleefully ignoring anyone who didn’t watch the moon landing live.
Until just recently when Biden stepped aside.
Yeah, kids are allowed to vote (and go off to war, and get themselves into crippling debt) at 18 but their decision making doesn’t mature until after they’re 25. Maybe adulthood should start a little later.
Something, something, rent a car. I definitely had something for this. Come back to me.
I can imagine it. I probably have made the same argument.
Their elders have done such a bang up job, eh. So much wisdom and here we all are blaming and knocking young people having to inherit all this bullshit.
speak for yourself
Yes, but. Let’s not circle the firing squad.
Not before they have voted.
Voting is not your utmost. It’s the bare minimum.
To whoever downvoted this: You won’t make it in life.
Remember, if they’re voting in their first election this year, there’s a decent chance they were under ten before Trump emerged on the scene as a politician. They don’t remember what it used to be like. They think this is normal.
Fucking yikes. That’s terrifying.
Shit, you’re absolutely right but I never thought about it that way.
Jesus, we’ve let these kids down. This is all they’ve known through their adolescence…
Jesus, we’ve let these kids down.
Yes, and people call them idiots for wanting better than a Hobson’s choice between “genocide” and “more genocide.”
Just look at what happened when someone listened to them.
but but “gene o’side” LMAO
Thank you for the illustration of my point. Biden isn’t running anymore. You can abandon your support for genocide. If you want to.
You mean real genocide or tankie illusional genocide? Because I’ll never support TIG.
You are glad that Netanyahu is committing genocide.
Like all centrists.
There will be an entire branch of psychology opened up for kids who were born between 2006-2021. War, climate change, Trump, COVID, more war, more war? On its own, the fact that they’re not spending every waking hour in ceaseless screaming is worth writing a few papers on.
I mean…lots of kids have had to deal with worse…my main frustration is that we could have given them so much better with relative ease.
My grandparents were born in the 30s, growing up in the Great Depression (all but one, who had the awful luck to be born in the Philippines, and instead of the depression, got to experience brutal Japanese occupation). That’s far worse than what American kids as a demographic are growing up with now, but that was entirely out of the hands of their parents to avoid.
I feel like for today’s teens, it’s not that bad, but it’s bad because of selfishness and greed rather than huge national or global tragedy.
I don’t know that the two events are particularly comparable. The misery level might be higher for people like your grandparents, but the fact that some of what’s going on now is happening inside the house during Thanksgiving dinner and another good chunk of it is being shown and talked about on YouTube as it happens, and a lot of people who are supposed to be protecting them aren’t… The circumstances, access, and response is worse, even if the misery itself isn’t as bad.
Still, I guess that illuminates how the “suffering Olympics” isn’t super helpful to these discussions. Every generation has something, and just because another generation also suffered doesn’t mean that this generation’s suffering is invalid.
maybe your worldview is a liiiitle bit too US-centric, or at least too 1st-world centric? Ah, don’t worry your mediocre little head about it!
We’re literally talking about young US voters. This thread is about US politics. I recognize that Americans’ americentrism online runs the gamut from annoying to problematic to outright jingoistic, but in this case I’m pretty sure I accurately recognized the topic at hand. Surely well enough not to merit an ad hominem.
aka the dumbest take.
Biden wasn’t the utmost to avoid Trump.
Who could’ve told
Absolutely doing my part, id love to see him fail again & the Republican party get cold feet supporting him next time around as a two time failure
I wonder if I can find the same kind of article about younger voters and conservative politicians on Twitter or Facebook
Yes you can
Probably, but it’s going to be based on anecdotes. This one actually has polling.
No they aren’t.
This is all manufactured bullshit by people spending money.
Still trying to find something that sticks, huh?
You guys are paid to keep making responses.
If any normal person reading this can’t acknowledge how fake this support is, I can’t help you. Good luck.
Removed, see the new civility addendum.
This is a refreshing change of pace. Usually I get called a shill for not being on board with Bidenyahu’s genocide.
🥱
Good shill talking point. You guys are trying real hard to paint biden as a bad guy and kamala as a solution to seem more legitimate in your rhetoric.
It’s hilarious watching Trumpists flail because they weren’t prepared for Biden to step down.
It’s sad watching how easily money can
influencecontrol public opinion.Can’t overtly call me a shill, so you’re obliquely calling me a shill.
Keep flailing for some attack that will land. It’s hilarious.
Kind of bothers me that her age and gender are such deciding factors for some. I think some of these people would have voted mtg if she ran.
this is a more surface level take than actually saying “i will vote because she’s a woman”
How so? I am glad she is running she has shifted things back in favor of democrats. I just think if someone would have really cared about what would happen under another four years under trump they would have voted biden anyway.
The party demonstrated responsiveness to voters’ concerns for the first time in decades.
I’ve been thinking about this story for almost a decade.
Right after the 2016 election, there was a panel with the creative teams behind US TV’s biggest political dramas. Veep, Scandal, West Wing, House of Cards, and other shows. All the panelists agreed on one point; if they’d presented a fictional character who said they ‘liked soldiers who didn’t get captured’ the networks and advertisers would have demanded that the character be shown to lose the election and be hated by all sides.
We can’t pretend that voters will do the right thing
If you’re complaining about all the people who are now coming on board you should probably just stfu and get on board with the new nominee and face the facts that people calling for Biden to exit were right and you were wrong. That out did matter and it made s huge difference.
Woot woot!
She’s not perfect. Like she’s a cop and such.
Still, she’s not raping folks. She’s not grabbing them by the pussy…
It’s bad. But all y’all better get on board. It can be a whole lot worse.
I’m getting tired of all this calling Harris a cop. She was a prosecutor but you’re equating her to ACAB.
Prosecutors are how you hold bad cops accountable, by prosecuting them. Do you condemn the prosecutors who put George Floyd’s murderers behind bars? (They were amazing!). Do you condemn the prosecutors who are holding accountable people like the Jan 6 insurrectionists, trump, bannon, giuliani, etc?
Who do you expect to do these things or do you not care if justice is done? I’m sick of this double standard.
I think people get too tied up with this idea of the “perfect” candidate
No candidate was, is, or shall be perfect.
Every politician that you have the opportunity to vote for will have some aspect of their past or their platform that you (or other voters) will disagree with in some capacity. And I fear that this need for perfection in their candidate is fertile ground for others to manipulate people’s attitudes towards not voting for an imperfect but otherwise good candidate.
I think people get too tied up with this idea of the “perfect” candidate
I think this is a strawman, given how much excitement there is for Harris, who is an acceptable compromise candidate.
She got behind the “defined the police” movement until she was added to the Biden team and had to back his administration’stances.
A former prosecutor who called out how overfunded police agencies are sounds like someone with pretty decent perspective from both sides. She understands both the value and shortcomings of law enforcement.
I honestly thought it was a bad idea to pivot to Harris but I was happily proven wrong. There’s so much excitement and energy surrounding her. Like a breath of fresh air. Glad to see it.
