this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
564 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19135 readers
2411 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The new matchup between Trump and Harris is helping Democrats close the enthusiasm gap, in part by capturing the attention and interest of young voters who historically vote at lower rates than older generations. But the historic nature of Harris’ candidacy as the party’s first Black woman and South Asian presidential nominee, coupled with the rapid shift in the campaign’s tone, has young voters of all political stripes taking a hard look — some for the first time — at the role they could play in November.

If motivated, Gen Z voters could have a major impact on elections. Texas’ population has the second youngest median age of any state, other than Utah. And in 2020, there were about 1.3 million Texans ages 18 to 24 who were registered to vote. Those voters have historically turned out to vote at rates lower than any other age range, with voter participation rates increasing steadily as age ranges increase.

About 43% of young Texans aged 18-29 voted in 2020 — an eleven point increase from 2016. 66% of all eligible voters and 76% of eligible voters age 64 and older voted that same year.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 159 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Look at that. Young people excited to vote. It's almost as though all the party needed to do was run a better candidate.

[–] SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone 60 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

I am always very cautious about leaning on the “youth vote“ too much because as much as we can rightfully blame the Democrats for putting their thumb on the scale against Bernie, he also thought the youth vote was going to save his ass and they simply did not show up in the numbers people expected, not by a large margin. Especially in 2020.

Also people tend to think Gen Z should save us from our mistakes when only about 75% of them are even age-eligible to vote this election. If was less than half in 2020 IIRC. Millennials and Gen X need to grab the reins and invite Gen Z along.

[–] DoctorWhookah@sh.itjust.works 46 points 3 months ago (2 children)

My GenX ass will be taking my Z’s to the polls with me!

I’m doing my part!

[–] dethedrus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 months ago

Same here on both counts!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

Agreed. And us old folks have it easier on election day because we are either a) retired or b) have a good job that doesn't care if we take a long lunch, come or go early.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

For someone who hasn't voted before, showing up in a primary with a random date is a lot harder than showing up on a single, nation-wide election day.

load more comments (1 replies)

One thing I've always hated about these articles (and by extension, this whole topic) is all the factors that are left out of the discussion. Like when people talked about Millennials not protesting like they did in the 60s, they conveniently ignore how things have changed for Gen X and younger - how more economically tenuous and unstable living conditions are, how senior jobs are still filled with Baby Boomers that would've retired a decade earlier had they been their parent's generation, how job benefits have declined (like time off), etc. Older people vote more not just because "young people are lazy," as so many of these discussions insinuate, but because they have better economic security, more time either through retirement or better job benefits, and more knowledge of the process. We won't see major shifts in Gen X and younger voting turnouts until we can improve work/life balance, because the Boomers pulled the ladder up after them and left the rest of us to slave away for 50 hours a week with no vacation time.

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Let's see if they actually do. I'm not holding my breath.

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

Why would you blame the youth when the southern establishment has repeatedly made it harder for them to vote in the first place?

Also Texas youth voter turnout has only gone up since 2016, and was instrumental of the purpling of Texas during both 2020 and the previous midterm elections. You're pulling the classic of blaming the younger generation for something that is not their fault.

Eat some avocado toast while educating yourself maybe.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

You're right. Fuck 'em. The only people who we should ever attempt to appeal to are decrepit conservative fossils. No one else will ever matter and boomers are immortal so we'll never need anyone else, so earning the resentment of multiple generations is something we can get away with.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 130 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Ngl if Texas and Florida go blue, it will be

  • hilarious
  • the death knell of trumpism
  • perhaps also the death knell of the GOP as a viable party
[–] Catma@lemmy.world 96 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If, and that is a huge if, Texas goes blue, Abbott and Paxton will 100% call it fraud and make Texas send Trump electors. There is 0 doubt in my mind on this. Things will get bad very quickly, because if Ttump loses Cruz lost in a blowout and a dem senator from Texas is paramount to heresy

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 41 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Oh yes. Guaranteed constitutional crisis, I think. Which is wild to say about what should be the world's leading democracy.

[–] Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

United States democracy fell on Jan 7th, 2021 which is when the filthy fascist traitor should have been immediately arrested and tried.

[–] ChronosTriggerWarning@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

2000, checking in. Dubya didn't win.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think it's when we put a shitty actor in the oval office on Jan 20, 1981.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

I think there is a history or something...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

"Interesting times"

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

IDK, every time I've thought the GOP was done, it clawed it's way back out of the still open grave.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

You are right on one thing, it has been done. That is, it's not the same party as before. If MAGA types had come up during Reagan, you better believe that the GOP would have denounced them. That party is dead, something new is here now. The question is really how long the party that uses the name GOP will survive.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It's a nice dream but sadly I don't think one that will happen this election. Gerrymandering and vote suppression has already seen to that.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Gerrymandering doesn't apply to most state's presidential elections, it applies to congressional house maps, not electoral votes

* technically Maine and Nebraska split votes by congressional district but they are kind of the exception here

Other forms of voter suppression in the presidential election though are certainty going on there to be fair

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Fair, though there is more being voted on this election than just the president. A lot of other political offices and referendums are up for vote and gerrymandering contributes to the widespread mentality that minority votes in a given district don't matter, even for the presidential election.

2020 had the highest voter turnout in US history, but that was still only 2/3 of eligible voters showing up at the polls, so 1 in 3 people (and usually it's more than that) decided it wasn't worth it likely because of that sense of futility caused by gerrymandering taking their political voice away.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago

This is precisely why I felt the need to clarify what specifically gerrymandering impacts because people often use it as a reason to feel hopeless, but we need to remind ourselves that there are still winnable fights out there if we fight them

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Gerrymandering

Gerrymandering can be pretty brittle. It relies on accurate models of who will vote and for whom. If the underlying assumptions are either wrong or change, then it can backfire. Here's an extreme napkin-math example to illustrate the point:

You have 3 districts. Candidate A is extremely unpopular. You split the voters to get 2 out of 3 districts for candidate A.

District 1:

Candidate A: 5%

Candidate B: 50%

Not Voting: 45%


District 2:

Candidate A: 20%

Candidate B: 15%

Not Voting: 65%


District 3:

Candidate A: 25%

Candidate B: 20%

Not Voting: 55%

As you can see, even though if you add up all the voters for candidate B they heavily outnumber candidate A's voters, by siloing them into one district you can win. But look at the margins for the other 2 districts. It doesn't take many new voters who you assumed wouldn't vote to upset your scheme. Depending on exactly how unpopular your candidate is, the margins for this might be pretty tight. It only takes an extra 10% of the voters moving from not voting to candidate B to cause a landslide 3 district sweep in this example.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It has been working well for them for a long time though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 69 points 3 months ago (1 children)

After Trump's meltdown over not winning Georgia I would pay good money to see him react to Blexas.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

Texas oblast will be correct and vote for best candidate Trump!

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 60 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I'll say it again Harris needs to really campaign harder in Texas. If she beats Bidens last vote total (in Texas) by a million votes I think she'll take the state and that's basically a guarantee to win the whole thing. I think state leadership is also overconfident in our "leans red" status and they aren't trying nearly as hard as other states to suppress votes. If the gap gets close but Trump still wins Texas I guarantee they'll make the next four years about stomping out blue opposition.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 56 points 3 months ago

Making the gop spend resources to defend Texas is a win even if you lose the state.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 25 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I think it is possible both Texas and Florida are actually in play come the election. Conventional wisdom focuses on the battleground states, but conventional wisdom would have picked Shapiro over Walz and we see how that went. I think you are right, and I hope the Harris campaign is bold and ambitious here.

Now bear in mind - actually flipping Texas sounds like an almost guaranteed constitutional crisis. But that's a problem for the future.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We Floridians voted for Obama twice and we're driving youth and women to the polling booths with abortion and weed on the ballot.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Given the above comments about the possible/likely constitutional crisis, it would be better to win those states but not rely on winning them to take the race. Best to assume that they are going to try pulling out all of the stops they can to steal this election and Florida and Texas are two states that are most likely to lean into that.

So she should try to win them but not at the expense of anywhere else.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 43 points 3 months ago (2 children)

even if doesn't flip, i'm all for turning red states into a bluer shade of purple, it delivers its own message

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

Thank you! People think their vote doesn't count if they lose. Even the dumbest politician can read an Excel sheet and see the gap closing in on them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] whyrat@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is great momentum; especially if it helps down ballot Colin Allred defeat Ted Cruz for the senate. Some polling has him within 5 points (or even tied in a few polls earlier this year). It's a bit of a stretch; but Texas is notorious for it's low voter turnout. Moving a few % of this non-voting population to feel like their vote matters & get them to show up would be enough to shift these races!

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 3 months ago

Why vote for rino Cruz when you can vote Allred!

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Don't do this to me. Don't give me hope. I've learned to live without it. Adding it back in now could be dangerous to my body.

[–] Sho@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It's sad when this is the general vibe of some ppl, but I get it, I'm there too. Still voting, just not getting too excited until I see some actual numbers.

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Yeah I feel the same. There's just a lot of ways this could turn out.

The polls could be inaccurate or we could have issues with turnout. It's great to see the Dems being as popular as they are on socials right now but it makes me anxious that this could just be a trend that doesn't lead into voter participation.

[–] DokPsy@infosec.pub 4 points 3 months ago

Me every time someone with some decent backing runs against Abbott, Cruz, Cornyn, and the rest.

[–] FarFarAway@startrek.website 9 points 3 months ago

If I had a nickel for every time someone said Texas was going to turn blue.

I'll believe it when I see it.

[–] GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

Technically 53% of eligible people cast a vote in 2020, which was 66% of registered voters.

The difference between a red and blue TX in 2020 was less than 5% of registered voters going to the polls for Biden.

Polls will be open Oct 21-Nov 1, with one final day to vote on Nov 5. If you procrastinate and go on the last day, there will be a line. If you go during the first 2 weeks of voting, there will be a 10 minute wait tops historically speaking. Polls will be open at leat 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours during the second week and final day of voting (typically 7AM-7PM, though times will vary). Check your voter registration status, eligibility for ballot by mail, Election Dates, polling locations and hours (might not be up until October), and more at this site.

https://www.votetexas.gov/

[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 13 points 3 months ago

I've been really excited for the hypothetical gerrymander backfire. If young people come out in enough numbers, they could turn all those counties blue.

load more comments
view more: next ›