Which Crap Centrist Will Represent The Republican Wing Of The Democratic Party In The End-- Definitely One From The B-Team

Last night the ad above started airing in New Hampshire. Bad news for Status Quo Joe, who depending on which poll you're looking at, is coming in first, second or third. The ad calls for the clueless candidate to drop out of the race and directs viewers to Roots Action's BidenFactSquad page which lists various quotes from Biden and his backers illuminating his history on issues such as income inequality, racial injustice, climate change, and criminal justice reform.

Jeff Cohen a co-founder of Roots Action's Action for a Progressive Future said in a statement that they "launched this ad to convey a simple message-- that Democrats would have a hard time defeating Trump with a candidate who belittles young voters and their very real struggles... Poll after poll shows that people under 35 are more progressive and more anti-Trump than older voters. Biden’s dismissive attitude raises the specter of a re-run of the 2016 Democratic defeat, when too many young people did not vote or voted third-party... The absolute wrong way to urge young people-- or any group-- into action is by minimizing the serious obstacles they confront."

Remember, turnout among voters under age 30 increased by almost 50 percent in the 2018 midterm elections (compared to 2014). People ages 18 to 35 will make up more than one-third of the electorate by November 2020. They aren't interested in an old white establishment hack fighting for the status quo ante. Being against Trump is necessary, but voters want more than just that. Poll after poll has shown that Biden has virtually no support among voters under 35, a demographic that heavily favors Bernie.

The B-Team... as in blecccchhhh

Yesterday Ben White and Daniel Strauss penned a piece for Politico insinuating that Bloomberg might be a factor among young voters, even though most young voters detest him. They refer to him as the new candidate of the young elite and makes the absurd claim that Mayo Pete is battling Biden and Bloomberg for young voters. Once you begin reading, you realize they're just talking about these young voters, overpaid Wall Street coke freaks. They wrote that Mayo Pete, somewhat absurdly, "was quickly locking down a solid lane in the Democratic primary: a young, vibrant, gay, midwestern, war veteran mayor with progressive ideas and plenty of money-- but both feet planted in fiscal prudence. Young Wall Street and tech-entrepreneur types were starting to fall in love-- with his poll numbers and fundraising totals underscoring the Buttigieg boomlet. He was the Parks and Recreation candidate in the Democratic field and an alternative to seventy-somethings Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders who are both looking to lock down the hyper-online progressive, anti-Wall Street crowd as well as blue collar workers across the Midwest." That's the "in-case-Biden-self-destructs" line the establishment keep repeating. They're eager to point out that Mayo is a lot younger than Status Quo Joe, "who has lagged in fundraising and hardly taken off in the big-donor crowd the way many expected. Buttigieg was poised to perhaps emerge as the leading moderate alternative to Biden." Biden is 76. But Bloomberg is a year older.

But then a funny thing happened last week: Another 70-something candidate beloved on Wall Street-- billionaire mogul Michael Bloomberg-- made an unexpected splash by suggesting he may still enter the race.

Bloomberg will not steal Buttigieg’s momentum with younger, wealthier Democratic voters and donors, people close to the South Bend mayor say. But the former NYC mayor does give Big Finance, Big Tech and other more corporate-friendly Democrats another progressive prospect as an alternative to Biden, Sanders and Warren.

“My own feeling is that Bloomberg getting in might-- if he stays in — might wind up getting rid of Cory Booker and Kamala Harris and others who haven’t done all that well,” said one of Buttigieg’s biggest New York bundlers. “At the end of this year, I still think it’s going to be Warren and Pete and Biden. And Pete will have plenty of money when it’s time to get into the big spending season and I don’t think Bloomberg will hurt his fundraising at all."

Indeed, multiple Wall Street executives who like Bloomberg suggested in recent days that they see a very narrow path forward for the former mayor. And that could leave Buttigieg hanging around as not-ultraliberal, not inclined to bust up major industries and not as old or potentially shaky as Biden.

And that leaves some young Democrats who work in tech and finance pretty optimistic.

For this group, a strong distaste for Warren and Sanders-- mixed with increasing doubts about the viability of Biden-- are creating the kind of opening to gain even more political and financial support that Buttigieg has been hoping for among key donor groups like Wall Street and the tech industry.

The Buttigieg boomlet in the financial community is enough to seriously annoy die-hard Biden backers on Wall Street who think the only way to stop Warren and Sanders is to double down on the former vice president, who still leads in most national polls despite his dips in some early primary states.

And Buttigieg’s youth, inexperience relative to other Democrats and thin support among the African American community are still giving potential donors pause.

“Look, Pete is definitely the new candidate of the young elite,” said a senior executive and major donor at a big Wall Street bank who backs Biden. “The problem is you can’t win the Democratic nomination without African American support. He doesn’t have any and nobody really knows who he is.”

That sentiment-- that Buttigieg is unknown-- is not borne out by either his rising poll numbers or his large fundraising numbers. Overall, Buttigieg's campaign has raised over $51 million, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Interviews with nearly a dozen Buttigieg backers in the investment community suggest the South Bend mayor’s mix of progressive stands on social issues and more moderate approaches to taxation, health care and the financial industry more broadly have kicked off a mini-movement among younger investor-types.

Buttigieg checks many of the boxes Wall Street executives are looking for: He’s more moderate on banking and health care than Warren but not too conservative as to turn off progressive voters. And he speaks the Wall Street language, as a Harvard-educated, former McKinsey consultant whose eyes light up at any chance to get technocratic.

Some Buttigieg bundlers say lately, as Biden’s candidacy has faltered, interest for the mayor has increased. “It started to feel like there was a high probability that Biden could falter and then there would be a big opening in the moderate lane,” said a bundler who hosted an event for Buttigieg over the summer but declined to be identified by name to avoid offending the former vice president or other candidates.

“A lot of the other candidates like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris kind of tried to straddle the moderate and progressive lanes and it just hasn’t worked for them. Mayor Pete took the approach of saying, ‘I’m just going to go with what I believe,’” this bundler said.

“The big obstacle really is the African American vote and he’s not proven he can win there yet and that bothers me. And it bothers me that part of that is because he’s gay. If he doesn’t win, fine. But I hope it’s not because he’s gay.”

It’s a sentiment many Buttigieg backers acknowledge: Mayor Pete winning the Democratic nomination is far from a sure thing. And now they face a new wrinkle with Wall Street-favorite Bloomberg possibly entering the race, occupying the lane of a mayor with extensive experience advocating for progressive policy changes.

Other Wall Street donors and bundlers are still holding back, waiting to see if Buttigieg can actually win something, before committing. “There are some people who are impressed with him but they really think he’s the guy in high school with the great future,” said a second Buttigieg Wall Street bundler of his conversations with potential new big donors. “I tell them he’s got a legitimate shot even though it sometimes feels like a crazy thing to tell people.”

Other campaigns are also taking note of Buttigieg’s support from Wall Street and tech donors and using it as a sharp line of attack, arguing that it shows he would lack boldness in reforming big industries and raising taxes on the wealthy to fund big new social programs like Medicare for All or the Green New Deal.

Buttigieg has supported a “Medicare for all who want it” approach. And he’s made the environment a centerpiece of his generational appeal but stopped short of fully embracing the most far-reaching elements of plans like the Green New Deal. Buttigieg praised the approach in a recent interview with Politico but stopped short of backing the enormous tax hikes associated with it. “We’re going to take our time doing our math before you see kind of a detailed tax policy framework from our effort,” he said.

Buttigieg’s ties to Wall Street donors probably won’t translate into the precise policies most financiers want. President Barack Obama, for instance, took plenty of donations from the finance world but still pushed and signed the Dodd-Frank law that so much of Wall Street opposed.

Still, some prominent liberals see the mayor as unacceptably close to the community of Wall Street and banking donors.

“He has more donations from billionaires than any other candidate. There are no surprises here. He made it very clear who he's standing with,” said former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner, the co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign. The “corporate types, the oligarchs of this country know that if Sen. Sanders wins he’s going to do the bidding of the 99 percent and not them.”

The latest Quinnipiac poll shows how registered voters nationally, 34 and under are looking at the Democratic primary contenders right now. I don't see Bloomberg, with his reactionary policies and repulsive personality is going to catch up with Yang, let alone with any of the top tier candidates.

• Bernie: 31%
• Elizabeth: 30%
• Mayo Pete: 12%
• Kamala: 6%
• Status Quo Joe: 6%
• Yang: 4%

Yesterday I spoke with exactly one dozen young candidates running for Congress. Not one of them indicated that they consider Mayo Pete a serious contender and not one of them had anything positive to say about him. 29-year old Dary Rezvani, for example, is the progressive Democrat challenging Trump enabler Devin Nunes in California's Central Valley. He told me that "Pete is a dangerous candidate because he is young and well-spoken, much like Obama. I think that the idea of identity politics, especially with millennials, is fading. We have seen so many politicians who just pander in order to get votes that we want someone that we can actually trust. Most of the under 30 crowd that I have spoken to only see him as an opportunist. If there is a candidate that I think actually has a chance of capturing tech and Wall Street it would be Yang."

Will Old Fogeys Curse The Democrats With Biden?

Last night I had a  long working-dinner with a world-famous author and neuroscientist whose new book on the aging brain is coming out early next year. He was explaining to me why the average person reports that their happiest years were around 80, if they live that long. There were quite a few reasons but one big one had to do with a tendency to shut out negativity and to focus exclusively on good news and happy memories (or happy manufactured memories). This is working out extraordinarily well for Biden, whose support among extremely old Democrats is overwhelming. Believe it or not, the Democratic Party could be saddled with Biden-- and because Trump will eat him alive-- another 4 years of Trump-- because of the votes of happy seniors, many of whom will never live to experience the results of a status quo policy agenda (Biden) or a reactionary policy agenda (Trump) that their votes curse the rest of us with.

This kind of messaging won't do a bit of good in shattering Biden's base of support (people over 75)

Every poll that breaks down the demography of the 2020 preference polls shows Bernie crushing it-- both nationally and in the early states-- among young voters. Elderly voters-- unable to recall why they once hated Biden's Republican instincts-- overwhelmingly prefer him to Bernie or any of the other candidates. Younger voters, who tend to be more idealistic and less apt to back corrupt corporate candidates like Biden, are a chink in Biden's armor. The problem, say the Democratic establishment types behind Biden, is that younger voters don't vote. Really? That don't vote when all they have to chose between are garbage candidates like Status Quo Joe and any Republican, but they're going to have to re-think that truism now.

A Future To Believe In-- or Trump/Biden

The Pew Research Center put out a fascinating poll yesterday that didn't ask about political preferences. What it showed is that Gen Z, Millennials and Gen X out-voted older generations in the 2018 midterms. That is an immense thunderclap that just landed on American political science. I knew that that was how AOC won her race but it turns out that it had a determining influence on how the Democrats managed to do so well in 2018.

Midterm voter turnout reached a modern high in 2018, and Generation Z, Millennials and Generation X accounted for a narrow majority of those voters, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available Census Bureau data.

The three younger generations-- those ages 18 to 53 in 2018-- reported casting 62.2 million votes, compared with 60.1 million cast by Baby Boomers and older generations. It’s not the first time the younger generations outvoted their elders: The same pattern occurred in the 2016 presidential election.

Higher turnout accounted for a significant portion of the increase. Millennials and Gen X together cast 21.9 million more votes in 2018 than in 2014. (The number of eligible voter Millennials and Gen Xers grew by 2.5 million over those four years, due to the number of naturalizations exceeding mortality.) And 4.5 million votes were cast by Gen Z voters, all of whom turned 18 since 2014.

By comparison, the number of votes cast by Boomer and older generations increased 3.6 million. Even this modest increase is noteworthy, since the number of eligible voters among these generations fell by 8.8 million between the elections, largely due to higher mortality among these generations.

Millennials, Gen Xers and Boomers all set records for turnout in a midterm election in 2018. Turnout rates increased the most for the Millennial generation, roughly doubling between 2014 and 2018 – from 22% to 42%. Among Generation Z, 30% of those eligible to vote (those ages 18 to 21 in this analysis) turned out in the first midterm election of their adult lives. And for the first time in a midterm election, more than half of Gen Xers reported turning out to vote. While turnout tends to increase with age, every age group also voted at higher rates than in 2014, and the increase was more pronounced among younger adults.

Together, Gen Z and Millennials reported casting 30.6 million votes, a quarter of the total. Gen Z was responsible for 4.5 million, or 4%, of all votes. This post-Millennial generation is just starting to reach voting age, and their impact will likely be felt more in the 2020 presidential election, when they are projected to be 10% of eligible voters.

Millennials, ages 22 to 37 in 2018, cast 26.1 million votes, far higher than the number of votes they cast in 2014 (13.7 million).

Generation X, those ages 38 to 53 in 2018, cast 31.6 million votes-- the first time they had more than 30 million votes in a midterm election. Their turnout rate also increased, from 39% in 2014 to 55% four years later.

Baby Boomers, those ages 54 to 72 in 2018, had their highest-ever midterm election turnout (64%, the same rate as the Silent Generation) and cast more votes than they ever have in a midterm (44.1 million). Still, they had a relatively smaller turnout increase than the younger generations (53% of Boomers turned out in 2014). Overall, Boomers cast 36% of ballots in last year’s election-- their lowest share of midterm voters since 1986-- because of mortality, while the younger generations are still growing due to naturalizations and adults turning 18.

Europeans attributed the unexpected increase in votes last weekend for Green parties across the EU to the same factors. Younger voters are looking for a better future. The older a voter gets, the more they just don't want anything to change. In Malta, 16 year olds got to vote for the first time, resulting in Malta having the highest turnout of any European country, in an election that same turnout turning much higher across the board almost everywhere. It;'s also worth noting that in Malta, the fascist party disintegrated electorally, the left scored a huge triumph and the mainstream conservative party also went down to a significant defeat.

Finally... The Youth Vote Was Real This Time

Mike Siegel didn't win his nearly impossible race in TX-10, a district with an R+9 PVI where Obama lost by 20 points to Romney and Trump beat Hillary 52.3% to 43.2%. The Republican incumbent, Michael McCaul is rich, powerful and very entrenched. The DCCC ignored the race but Mike ran a classic grassroots campaign that held McCaul down to 50.9%, his weakest showing since first being elected in 2004. Last cycle the Democrat received 38.4% and the cycle before that 34.1% even in the Democratic wave elections of 2006 and 2008, one Democrat got 40.4% and the next 43.1%. In other words, Siegel did better against McCaul than anyone else ever had. He raised $437,883 compared to McCaul's $1,618,946. There was no significant outside spending to bolster either candidate. So what happened to bring Siegel's vote so much higher than any previous Democratic campaign there?

He's an exceptionally good candidate. He put together an exceptionally good team. Blatant and bigoted voter suppression none county-- something he fought and won-- brought him local and national exposure. All good. And Trump, of course. But what that enough to jump from 38.4% to 46.9% in 2 years?

At the end of October, I caught up with Mike as he was driving from one small town to another in the middle of the sprawling district. He gave me an in-depth look at early voting in the district. I wasn't surprised that women were voting significantly more than men-- 52-48%-- but there were two things that did surprise me. One was that Travis County (Austin) had registered 94.5% of all eligible voters, which is the highest number I've ever heard in my life. On election day, the county wound up give Mike a gargantuan D+43 advantage. And the other point was that millennials have been voting at unprecedented rates. Democrats are always waiting for younger voters to come through-- but they rarely do. Mike's anecdotal and local statistical data was backed up by Harvard's Fall 2018 National Youth Poll. The poll looked for engagement for voters between 18 and 29 years old and found them to be "significantly more likely to vote in the upcoming midterm elections compared to 2010 and 2014. Overall, 40 percent report that they would 'definitely vote' in the midterms, with 54% of Democrats, 43% of Republicans and 24% of Independents considered likely voters."

This morning I talked with Mike again. I'm hoping he runs again, of course and when I asked him about the youth vote, I heard a lot of optimism. "The vote confirmed what we were feeling on the ground," he told me, "that this seat is winnable, and that we have large pockets of potential Democratic voters who are waiting to be engaged in the political process. My team is sitting down to analyze what we did well and what opportunities we left on the table. The 10th District will remain in its current form for one more election in 2020, before the map is redrawn again. Even though Tom Delay and Karl Rove worked to draw this District to be 60% Republican, we think it could flip Democrat if we continue to build on our gains this year."

A follow-up memo, released Wednesday, from John Della Volpe, the director of polling at Harvard's Institute of Politics, confirmed that young voters did indeed turn out-- bigly!

He referenced a study from Tufts University that found that "approximately 31 percent of youth (ages 18-29) turned out to vote in the 2018 midterms, an extraordinary increase over the CIRCLE estimate in 2014 and the highest rate of turnout in at least 25 years. In 2014, IOP estimates that approximately 10.8 million young Americans voted (Democrats preferred 54%-43%), compared to 14.7 million in 2018 (Democrats preferred 67%-32%). The actual number of Republican votes cast by those under 30 remained stable from 2014 to 2018, while nearly all of the nearly 4 million increase in turnout came from those supporting Democrats.

Voters under 30 (estimated share of 13% of electorate) were credited by NBC News analysts as one of the key groups that led to a Democratic takeover of the House, along with African Americans (estimated share of 11%), Hispanic/Latino Americans (share 11%), and those with no religious preference (17%).  Exit polls have indicated that voters under 30 preferred Democrats by a +31 margin, tracking closely with our final IOP poll conducted after the Kavanaugh hearings that indicated a Democratic preference of +34.  For example, if the proportion of young voters on Tuesday mirrored traditional midterm youth turnout, districts such as TX-32 (incumbent House Rules Chair Rep. Pete Sessions lost by -6) and GA-06 (Newt Gingrich’s former seat, won with 2,145 vote margin by Democrat Lucy McBath) would likely not have flipped from Republican to Democratic control.

According to analysis of exit polls, young voters also played a critical role in Democrats winning the Senate seat in Nevada, and made the Texas Senate race more competitive than polls predicted (RCP average Cruz +6.8, Cruz was winning by 2.62 points with 97% of ballots counted). Exceeding the national youth margin for Democrats (from +31 to +37, likely because of young Hispanic voters), propelled Jacky Rosen to victory in Nevada over incumbent Dean Heller.

...In Texas, voters under 30 preferred O’Rourke to Cruz, 71 percent to 29 percent (+42), and among those between 30 and 44, the margin was cut to only +4, 51 percent to 47 percent; Cruz won the over 45 vote by +16.  Compared to the national electorate, O’Rourke overperformed with voters under 30, but underperformed with those between 30 and 39. If his margin of support among 30 to 39 year olds better reflected the national electorate-- he would have won the election. Estimates are they he would have needed a margin of 20 points or less with voters in their 30s.

In Florida, voters under 30 preferred Gillum to DeSantis, 62 percent to 36 percent (+26), and among those between 30 and 44, it was 61 percent to 33 (+28) percent for Gillum; DeSantis won the over 45 vote by +9.

In the Georgia race for Governor, Kemp led with both men and women (+6 for men and +1 for women); however, among voters under 30, Abrams led by +27, by +16 among 30-to-44 year olds, and lost those over 45 by +19.

While we will not have a final tally of votes cast for several weeks, Edison Research has estimated as many as 113 million may have voted, and the United States Election Project has estimated a national turnout of 111.5 million which makes this the first midterm election that will surpass the 100 million vote mark. The Election Project projects a national turnout rate of 47.3 percent which equals the 1970 rate and trails the modern record of 48.7 percent from 1966.  We are confident that the increased turnout rate among young Americans under 30 matched, and likely surpassed older age groups-- and will set modern records once tallies are finalized.

A generation that has consistently told us in polling that they have more fear than hope about the future seem prepared to further engage in politics and policy (look for a more progressive domestic agenda and heightened demand for gun violence prevention legislation).  We fully expect that they will play a significant role in shaping our country's future through their commitment to service and renewed interest in politics.

On a national basis, young voters overwhelming preferred Democrats over Republicans in 2018. Both CNN’s and CBS’ exit poll analysis indicated a preference of 67 percent to 32 percent (+35) for Democrats; in Fox’s analysis the margin was 59 percent to 32 percent (+27).  In 2014, the Democratic advantage was +11 and in the 2016 presidential, the Democratic advantage was +19.

Age now accounts for one of the most significant divides in America; 35 percent of the electorate was estimated to be younger than 45 years old and they preferred Democrats, 61 to 36 percent (+25); among those 45 and older, Republicans were preferred by one percentage point.

Women preferred Democrats +19, men preferred Republicans by +4.  Among white voters, Republicans were preferred by +10, while Blacks (+81), Hispanics (+41), and Asians (+54) preferred Democrats. College graduates preferred Democrats by +13, while those without a college degree split evenly. White men preferred Republicans by +21, white women split evenly, 49 to 49 percent.

With Democratic preference at 67 percent in exit polls, this is a marked improvement over the 55 percent of the vote that Hillary Clinton received according to 2016 exit polls and the 54 percent that Democrats received in the 2014 midterms.

...Based on analysis of Early and Absentee voting patterns by Democratic data firm TargetSmart, it was found that the share of voters under 30 who voted early increased by a higher percentage than any other age group in the electorate, from 5.39 percent in 2014 to 8.67 percent in 2018.  This is a difference of more than 2.1 million additional votes.

...Based on analysis of Early and Absentee voting patterns by Democratic data firm TargetSmart, it was found that the share of voters under 30 who voted early increased by a higher percentage than any other age group in the electorate, from 5.39 percent in 2014 to 8.67 percent in 2018.  This is a difference of more than 2.1 million additional votes.

NextGen America published a list of 41 “youth-dense precincts” across the country to monitor over the course of Election Day. More than 50 percent of all registered voters in each of these “Youth Vote Indicator Precincts” were between the ages of 18 and 35. In 40 precincts that have comparable data from 2014, it was found that turnout increased on average from 24 percent to 45 percent. Turnout increased in 93 percent of the 40 precincts-- and in some cases, turnout eclipsed 60 percent, including in CA-49’s UC-San Diego precinct, FL-05’s Tallahassee/Florida A&M precinct, NH-02’s Hanover/Dartmouth College precinct, and PA-07’s East Stroudsburg University precinct.

Prognosticators Have Never Learned How To Rate Races In A Wave Election-- And Pollsters Can't Get Their Models Straight

Polls are all based on "likely voters." A campaign manager I was talking to last week was in a rush because he was still dragging homeless people onto buses to feed them sandwiches, etc and get them to the early voting stations. Over a thousand. Likely voters? Not a chance. Early voting shows "unexpected" upturns for women voters, black voters, Latino voters and millennials voters. How many extra seats is that worth to the Democrats beyond what the pollsters and prognosticators predicted? 10? 20? 30?

Last week Time Magazine warned them: Youth Voter Turnout in the Midterm Elections Could Be Historic, According to a New Poll. "Young voters could turn out to vote at record-breaking levels in the midterm elections next month, according to a new poll. The poll, released Monday by the Institute of Politics at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, found 40% of 18 to 29-year-olds say they will 'definitely vote' in the midterm elections on Nov. 6. Youth voter turnout has historically been dismal in midterm elections, which tend to draw fewer voters overall than presidential election years. The highest rate of youth voter turnout in past midterm elections was 21% in both 1986 and 1994, according to the Harvard report... In the 2014 midterm elections, 19.9% of adults under 30 voted-- 'the lowest rate of youth turnout recorded in the past 40 years.' In the 2016 presidential election, 46.1% of adults under 30 voted-- an increase from 2012, but still the lowest turnout rate of any age group."

In this year’s poll, a larger percentage of young Democrats (54%) than young Republicans (43%) indicated they were likely to vote.. Overall, 66% of respondents supported Democrats taking back control of Congress, compared to 32% for Republican control.

So how's that working out today? We don't know yet, but what we do know is that millennials turned out big in early voting. Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that early voting is pointing to a "Youth Wave."

Youth turnout rates in the midterm early vote are up by 125 percent compared to 2014, according to Catalist, a voter database servicing progressive organizations-- an eye-popping and historically high figure, say strategists on both the left and the right.

Young Americans ages 18 to 29 who say they are definitely voting tilt leftward, according to polls. But the data also shows young Republicans are bubbling with enthusiasm headed into tomorrow.

...2020 implications: Among young people polled, 59 percent said they would “never” vote for President Trump vs. 11 percent who said they'd be “sure to” vote for him.

... GOP pollster Chris Wilson, the CEO of WPA Intelligence, told us he thought it was a “bit too much” to call the turnout “historic.” But he said the electorate is looking younger “than both the 2016 and 2014 general elections. “Voters under 25 are outpacing their vote share from both the 2016 and 2014 general. Proportionately it’s not enough to make a huge difference, but it’s more,” Wilson said.

Nine months after 17 students were killed in a mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., Della Volpe's firm, SocialSphere, found that school shootings are the most worrisome issue to young Americans.

Surge in activism = a surge in voting: Tom Bonier, a Democratic  strategist and head of the firm Targetsmart, told us that skeptics initially cast doubt on the firm's findings that the “share of youth registrants nationwide increased by 2.16 percent” after the Parkland shooting in February.  A September memo showed that turnout among young people increased by an average of 4 percent in the 2018 primaries vs. 2014 primaries-- and doubled in some battleground states compared to 2014. Per Bonier, “Pennsylvania . . . has seen youth voter registration surge by 10 points after [Parkland]. Youth voters make up nearly 60 percent of all new Pennsylvania registrants.”

The mass shooting generation is showing up: We spoke with Jackie Corin, co-founder of March for Our Lives, who voted for the first time last week. Corin, along with a handful of her peers, has been traveling the country, meeting with lawmakers and mass shooting survivors, speaking on college campuses and visiting communities to build what the group calls a “youth infrastructure” to carry over into 2020. 

• Civic engagement is cool: “Activism is becoming more of a normalized activity for teenagers-- they are seeing their friends get involved with campaigns and issues and it’s spreading like wildfire,” Corin added.
• Twitter working against Trump?: Corin also credited the spike in awareness and engagement to Trump's Twitter habits. “The president uses Twitter as main source of communication and that’s something that young people see every single day-- they’re always on Twitter and Instagram so they're more engaged about what's going on.”
• Real progress: Since the Parkland shooting that killed 17, over 60 state laws have been passed tightening gun control. “The constant mass shootings are large motivators … it’s what has activated thousands and thousands of people across this country,” Corin said.

We still don't know if the shift pollsters are seeing in early voting will be reflected at the ballot box.

So far today, it very much looks like it is. Meanwhile, everyone agrees that the likeliest of likely voters are seniors, particularly retirees. It's undeniable that they vote more than any other age group and that in recent decades that have been more prone to vote Republican. That party preference seems to have flipped on its head this cycle. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported that campaign donors "who identify their occupation as 'retired' gave 52% of the $326 million they contributed through Oct. 17 to Democrats, compared with 48% to Republicans according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. That is a reversal of their split four years ago-- and it’s a record amount of midterm money from retirees. This is the first midterms since the group began keeping donor industry data in 1990 in which retirees favor Democrats over Republicans. That year, retirees gave 76% of their $15 million in contributions to Republicans and 24% to Democrats. As social security and Medicare have become hot-button political issues, retiree donors have steadily crept toward Democrats, the center’s data show. By 2002, the GOP advantage among retiree donors had declined to 63% versus 36%. Eight years later, the split was 55%-44%."

Can The Youth Vote Save Schumer's Crap Senate Candidates? Will They Even Want To?

On Monday we looked at a new poll from Reuters showing that white educated voters who went for Trump in 2016 are less favorable towards him now and plan to take it out on Republican congressional candidates in November. As if that wasn't bad enough for Señor T and the party that has been complicit in everything he's done to turn America against him, Harvard just released its 35th National Youth Poll, examining the political opinions and civic engagement of young Americans ages 18 to 29. They found "a marked increase in the number of young Americans who indicate that they will 'definitely be voting' in the upcoming midterm Congressional elections. Overall, 37 percent of Americans under 30 indicate that they will 'definitely be voting,' compared to 23 percent who said the same in 2014, and 31 percent in 2010, the year of the last 'wave' election. Young Democrats are driving nearly all of the increase in enthusiasm; a majority (51%) report that they will 'definitely' vote in November, which represents a 9-percentage point increase since November 2017 and is significantly larger than the 36 percent of Republicans who say the same. At this point in the 2014 election cycle, 28 percent of Democrats and 31 percent of Republicans indicated that they would 'definitely' be voting. In the Spring of 2010, 35 percent of Democrats and 41 percent of Republicans held a similar interest in voting.

Preference for Democratic control of Congress has grown between now and the time of the last IOP poll. In Fall 2017, there was a 32-point partisan gap among the most likely young voters, 65 percent preferring Democrats control Congress, with 33 percent favoring Republicans.

Today, the gap has increased to 41 points, 69 percent supporting Democrats and 28 percent Republicans. “Millennials and post-Millennials are on the verge of transforming the culture of politics today and setting the tone for the future,” said John Della Volpe, Polling Director at Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics. “This generation of young Americans is as engaged as we have ever seen them in a midterm election cycle.

The concern they have voiced for many years about the direction of the country is being channeled into a movement that will extend to the midterms elections and beyond.”

Bad news for the GOP? Yeah, but there's more. Now they're worried about the shitty pack of inferior candidates they have running for Senate. David Drucker reported for WashingtonExaminer.com that "Republicans fear the party could blow a golden opportunity to pad its 51-49 Senate majority after watching a collection of underwhelming candidates emerge as the likely nominees in key contests. The Republican Party entered the 2018 cycle threatening incumbent Democrats in 10 states that President Trump carried in 2016. Even as immediate dissatisfaction with Trump quickly threatened the Republican majority in the House, a favorable map acted to shield the GOP from similar headwinds in the Senate."

It's funny, 2016 was based on a map that was awesome for Democrats, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and Jon Tester blew the opportunity that wass handed to them on a silver platter. The Republicans are doing the exact same thing to themselves this cycle.

Seven months before Election Day, Republicans are worrying about dwindling opportunities as candidates that are some combination of defective, unimpressive and underfunded appear headed toward victory in a handful of GOP primaries.

The party has its share of good Senate recruits this cycle in targeted Democratic seats: Rep. Kevin Cramer in North Dakota; state Attorney General Josh Hawley in Missouri; Army combat veteran and businessman John James in Michigan; Gov. Rick Scott in Florida. Minimal resistance to their nomination is expected-- if any.

But in other promising races, including in states where Trump’s job approval ratings are solid, the field of primary candidates has left some GOP insiders unenthused. Republicans are monitoring primaries in Montana, Ohio, and Wisconsin before passing final judgment; they’re bullish on Indiana regardless, although they describe that more as an “indictment” of vulnerable Democratic Sen. Joe Donnelly.

Conditions are even worse in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states that have strong concentrations of Trump voters. In Pennsylvania, Republicans have all but written off Rep. Lou Barletta, who is challenging Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) and they have a huge problem in West Virginia-- one that could put the state out of reach.

Trump won West Virginia by more than 40 percentage points and he sports an 60-plus percent approval rating there, making Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) extraordinarily vulnerable. But none of it matters if mining executive Don Blankenship wins the Republican nomination over Rep. Evan Jenkins and state Attorney General Patrick Morrissey.

Blankenship was convicted in federal court two years ago of conspiring to violate mine safety standards in an explosion that left 29 West Virginia coal miners dead. No matter; with superior resources and anti-establishment credentials, he could win the May 8 primary.

“If that guy gets the nomination forget contesting that seat. It’s like Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell all over again.” a Republican operative with West Virginia ties said. This individual was referring to 2010 Senate races the GOP lost in Nevada and Delaware.

Angle, in Nevada, and O’Donnell, in Delaware, were flawed candidates with minimal general election appeal. Each lost a race considered eminently winnable in what turned out to be a GOP wave year. Angle and O’Donnell managed to win their respective primaries because their sharp rhetoric and anti-establishment credentials swayed Republican primary voters.

Republicans are worried that too many weak candidates, especially in an election cycle shaping up as a backlash against their leadership in Washington, could jeopardize the party’s prospects of maximizing potential gains, despite a map of contested seats that tilts in their favor. Republicans also could find themselves defending as many as four seats.

Some Republican strategists dissent from their anxious colleagues. Republican primary voters, they say, are looking for authenticity and aggressiveness. The usual resume that would describe a GOP candidate as top tier-- accomplished, well spoken, genteel-- no longer applies, and won’t motivate base turnout in November.

That’s an important factor to consider with Democrats enjoying a yawning enthusiasm gap over Republicans as the midterm draws nearer.

“The Republican Party has moved. Everyone wants to look at Trump like he’s an outlier-- he’s not an outlier,” one veteran Republican strategist said. “The Republican primary voter doesn’t like the same old, buttoned-up politician bullshit. That’s over; it’s not going to happen anymore.”

The GOP’s candidate recruiting issues are complicated. There isn’t necessarily much the party could have done to avoid them.

The party was all set with top tier picks in Montana and Ohio. Then Trump tapped then-Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT) to serve as Interior secretary, and Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel was forced to exit the Senate race to attend to his wife’s health issues. And in these and other states, the bench was thin without them, though not empty.

In Montana, Democratic Sen. Jon Tester could still face a tough fight against one of the two likely GOP nominees, businessman Troy Downing or state Auditor Matt Rosendale. The same might also be the case for Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin, where state Sen. Leah Vukmir and Iraq War veteran Kevin Nicholson, a former Democrat, are running for the Republicans.

Meanwhile, Trump’s choice to replace Mandel in Ohio was Rep. Jim Renacci, and he answered the president’s call when it came. Of course, first he must get through banker Mike Gibbons, who is trying to run as the heir to Trump-- an outsider businessman.

There might be a saving grace for them though. The two likeliest GOP seats to flip blue from red are in Arizona and Nevada-- and Schumer, who never picks good candidates, decided conservatives Kyrsten Sinema and Jackie Rosen should be the next senators from Arizona and Nevada, setting up lesser-of-two-evils campaigns, always a terrible idea. The wave is looking like it will be strong enough to sweep these two inferior candidates into office but you never know with such crappy candidates how many disillusioned voters will just decide top not vote at all.

Meanwhile, Democratic voter enthusiasm is still sky high, while GOP desire to get to the polls is still flagging-- even in Florida, where Republican prospects haven't been that bad. Yesterday, in a state Senate special election in Palm Beach County, Lori Berman crushed Republican Tami Donnally (31st District) by a massive 74.8% to 25.2%, the highest share of the vote received by any Florida Democrat in at least a decade. Yes, it's a blue district that no one expected a Republican to win. BUT, the swing away from Trump in the 2016 presidential vote was very significant. In 2016 Hillary beat Trump 61.38% to 36.31%. Trump lost the 31st by around 25 points but yesterday Donnally, the vice chair of the Palm Beach County Republican Party, lost by nearly 50%. Now that's a swing that screams "blue wave!" Donnally, in a prelude to November: "I’m disappointed more Republicans didn’t come out to vote. And I don’t know why." The GOP needs to look in the mirror and figure out why.

Young Americans Are Sick Of DC Political Corruption

Capitol Hill power-players Schumer & Ryan are NOT admired by young people

Frank Luntz is a well-known right-wing pollster, consultant and strategist. He's best known for his focus groups for Fox News and for winning PolitiFact's Lie of the Year Award in 2010 for making up all the disinformation Republicans were using in their fight against health care. Luntz isn't considered a reputable source anywhere-- except on Fox. I don't know who commissioned his new poll and report, The Attitudes and Priorities of the Snapchat Generation, but I bet they weren't thrilled with the results. Lo and behold-- young people are liberal! Lunt also labels then "refreshingly, resoundingly sunny about America’s future."

His "Snapshot Generation" refers to Americans, aged 18 to 26. And if they seem "refreshingly, resoundingly sunny about America’s future" it's not likely that Luntz's right-wing clients will be when they read and digest his findings. Who is the political figure this cohort likes and respects most?

• Bernie Sanders- 31%
• Barack Obama- 18%
• Hillary Clinton- 11%
• Herr Trumpf- 9%
• Ted Cruz- 5%
• George W. Bush- 5%
• Dr. Ben- 4%
• Bill Clinton- 3%
• Young fogey Marco Rubio- 3%
• Rand Paul- 2%
• Joe Biden- 1%
• Paul Ryan- 1%
• Jeb Bush- 1%
• Chris Christie- 0%
• Harry Reid- 0%
• Chuck Schumer- 0%

Rubio, a robotic, anti-Choice fanatic, warmongering neocon and a homophobic extremist-- homophobic in a way only ex-gays can be-- was always an old rich white man's vision for what would appeal to young people. Like Paul Ryan.



Another finding of Luntz's unlikely to give any of those old rich white men woodies was that among those extremely liberal young people "fully 87% are likely to vote in the coming Presidential election. The Obama youth turnout was not just because it was for Barack Obama. This election cycle has clearly captured the imagination of first- and second-time voters. In fact, two-thirds (65%) are 'extremely likely' to participate. Politicians, ignore young voters at your own peril. Because they sure as hell aren’t ignoring you."

Nor is the next finding very Republican-friendly. "What profession do these young people respect most? Simply stated, those who serve, heal, and protect. Given a list of 16 professions, respondents by wide margins said they most respected nurses and doctors (49%), teachers (48%), and the military (45%)... At the very bottom were business leaders at 6%, elected officials (a nicer way to say politicians) at 4% and bankers dead last at 2%. Is there any surprise then that Bernie Sanders has come so far with a campaign aimed squarely at the banks, the politicians and the special interests? He’s hitting the same people despised by his core constituency-- and he’s doing it incredibly well. Young people respect people who get their scrubs, uniforms, and hands dirty-- not people who keep their expensive suits spotless."


The next finding shouldn't just be worrying for Republicans, but equally worrying for corrupt Democratic Party bosses like Schumer, Hoyer, Wasserman Schultz, the Clintons, Rahm Emanuel, that ilk. The question was "What does the Snapshot generation reject most?" And right on top is the one-world descriptor of almost all the big names in politics. "'Corruption' is Public Enemy No. 1 to young Americans. They think it’s rampant, from Wall Street to Washington, and this rejection of corruption underlies all of their public policy opinions."

Marin Cogan was once a congressional reporter for Politico. If you didn't understand Politico you;d think she knows something about politics. She doesn't. Her fatuous piece for New York yesterday, Is There A "Next Obama" On The Democratic Party Bench?, should have Democrats throwing up in their mouths. The utterly clueless Cogan purports to present New York readers with "ten young Democrats who, like Obama, have unusual ambition, an inspiring life story, a gift for public oratory, or some combination of the three... [T]hey just might be poised to break out eight years from now. They are the future of the party that styles itself the party of the future."

Her first pick is, from a moron's-perch, "the bisexual congresswoman who grew up homeless." She's also talking about the horrifyingly corrupt Blue Dog, widely despised by her colleagues, who votes with the Republicans more than any Democrats but two, Kyrsten Sinema. Corgan alludes to her hideous voting record by an admiring mention that "she is known for actually working with Republicans." How has she voted with the GOP? Well she voted to freeze the pay of federal workers, routinely votes against Democratic budgets, favors unconstitutional domestic spying on American citizens, supports the Wall Street banksters in their deregulation bids and their attempts to gut Dodd-Frank (efforts that have netted her $972,071 in bribes that should have landed her in prison), voted to shred the Food Stamps program, votes for Big Oil subsidies and off-shore oil drilling, was one of only 4 far right-wing Democrats to vote to kill Elizabeth Warren's Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection an when only the 7 worst Democrats in Congress worked with the GOP to set up the Benghazi witch hunt against Hillary, the only woman among them was... yes, Kyrsten Sinema.

Way down the list is Nevada progressive, Lucy Flores, who's running 4th in a 4-way congressional primary. Our expert on congressional matters, Marin, mentions that "[T]he Harry Reid protégée is running for Congress and actively campaigning for Bernie Sanders," which is true, but she left out that Reid is campaigning against her and trying to elect Ruben Kihuen instead. She then refers to Cedric Richmond as "the only remaining black member of Louisiana’s congressional delegation," as though to imply that there have at some point been more than one. Maybe in the Reconstruction era right after the Civil War... but not since.

And, by the way, Cogan's entire list of young future Obamas are in their 40s and 50s. Better than most of her picks to wind up in the White House one day: L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti, Wisconsin state Senator Chris Larson, and former Ohio Secretary of State Nina Turner.

Don't Blame The Defeat Of The Ossified Beltway Democrats On Young Voters Not Showing Up

Mostly old and in the way

Yesterday NBC News and the Wall Street Journal released a poll, from which the sclerotic Beltway Democrats, who are utterly steeped in denial about their own national rejection, will take solace. These are the 5 top priorities respondents gave the pollsters:

• 82% support Congress providing access to lower the costs of student loans;
• 75% support increasing spending on infrastructure, roads and highways;
• 65% support Congress raising the minimum wage;
• 60% support approving emergency funding to deal with Ebola in West Africa;
• 59% support addressing climate change by limiting carbon emissions

These are all Democratic Party initiatives being pushed aggressively by progressives like Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Alan Grayson (D-FL). Conversely most of the conservative ideas that the Koch brothers have been pushing through their puppet politicians like Paul Ryan (R-WI), John Boehner (R-OH) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) did not find majority support:

• 34% support gradually raising Social Security's retirement age to 69
• 41% support cutting federal funding for the Affordable Care Act
• 44% support TPP/NAFTA-like trade agreements with Asian countries
• 44% support reducing Medicare and Social Security benefits for wealthier retirees
• 49% support authorizing the use of U.S. troops to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria

The only Republican Party position with actual majority support is for building the Keystone XL pipeline (54%)-- something that seems to be at odds with the even greater support to address climate change by limiting carbon emissions.

Nancy Pelosi replaced her failed Blue Dog head of the DCCC, Steve Israel, with someone, Ben Ray Lujan, who was once part of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and who can't help but be an improvement over Israel. But Israel was given a leadership position-- in messaging no less, his biggest single failure-- and Lujan has already announced he's not changing anything at the dysfunctional, corrupt and utterly incompetent DCCC. The Beltway Democrats, lead by a pathetically geriatric cadre of over-the-hill politicians, would rather blame the voters than look inward. That's not going to do anyone any good... except the Republicans.

Andy Bernstein of HeadCount and Ashley Spillane of Rock the Vote, dispute the narrative being pushed by hacks like DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, eager only to deflect blame from herself, that it was the fault of young people not showing up at the polls. Even beyond what it would take to ask oneself why young people were discouraged from voting, the whole premise isn't even based in fact.

A week after the midterm election, you can hardly pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV without seeing a headline about disappointing turnout among Millennials this election cycle. We’d like to take this opportunity to say to all the Millennials out there-- and to their critics-- shake it off and take another look at the data.

In a horrendous political climate that left the majority of voters in the country opting out of this election, young voters didn’t succumb to this trend. According to data published by CIRCLE, Millennials comprised 13 percent of voters this year, up 2 percent from 2010, when youth voters counted for 11 percent of the electorate. They cast 9.9 million votes, up from 9 million four years before-- a modest increase of 0.6 percent.

Meanwhile, overall turnout was down to its lowest levels since WWII.

We aren’t declaring victory. When barely one-in-four young people voted in this year’s election, we know there is so much more work to do. But the bottom line is: young people are actually bucking the national trend.

They turned out in spite of growing up in an era of complete dysfunction in Washington, when approval ratings for Congress and party affiliations are at an all-time low. They turned out despite the lack of attention being paid to the issues they care most about. They turned out despite of the challenges erected to their participation through new voting laws all over the country.

Over the past two years alone, 10 states have passed restrictive voting laws purposefully intended to limit young people’s ability to register to vote and cast their ballots. This in spite of evidence that states with a photo voter ID law saw, on average, a 4.4 percent lower turnout than those that did not.

In North Carolina, early voting was curtailed and same-day registration was eliminated. In Arizona and Kansas, efforts included requiring voters to provide proof of citizenship upon registering. In Tennessee, college professors could use their university IDs to vote, but students were barred from doing the same. And perhaps most absurdly: voters in Texas could use a gun license to vote, but not a student ID.

...As a part of our coalition with civic engagement organizations, tech companies, and cultural leaders, our organizations registered nearly 700,000 voters this year-- critical considering that 12,000 young people turn 18 each day.

The increase in youth voter turnout in 2014 sends a powerful message that many seem to be missing: even with so much working against them, Millennials are on the precipice of becoming the most influential voting bloc in the United States. This is the country’s largest and most diverse generation-- over 90 million strong, with more than 43% identifying as non-white. Close to 90% say they gave to charity last year and close to 50% volunteer for causes they believe in.

Young people are the future, and this generation in particular wields incredible influence. Politicians and pundits should sit up and take notice; after all, Election Day 2016 is only 728 days away.

Loving On Empty

Last week Rickie Lee Jones was in Orlando helping Alan Grayson turn out the voters in front of his 75% primary victory on Tuesday. A fews weeks before Peter Case did two concerts for Grayson supporters in the Bay Area. And Grayson isn't the only Democrat turning to musicians to help turn out young voters. Our friends at HeadCount are doing voter registration drives with, among others, Jason Mraz, Spoon, Wilco and the Black Keys.

With young voters more apathetic about voting and government than ever, several organizations are trying to woo the “selfie generation” to the polls this fall.

"About half of those who vote in presidential elections do not vote in midterms," explained Andy Bernstein, executive director of HeadCount, a non-partisan organization that partners with musicians to get youth engaged in politics.

While overall turnout among young voters in presidential elections has grown, turnout for midterms has stagnated, according to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIVIC).

In 2010, the under-30 vote dropped 27 percent since Obama first sailed to victory two years earlier, according to CIVIC analysis of Census data.

Bernstein's group hopes to engage these so-called drop-off voters by riding the popularity of musicians.

HeadCount will go on tour with the band The Black Keys for 15 shows in more than a dozen cities from Sept. 6 through Nov. 3 registering young voters.

…Musicians and celebrities often jump into the political game, most often for Democrats. For instance, Katy Perry has already promised to write Hillary Clinton's campaign song if she runs for president. Other entertainers were heavily involved in President Obama’s presidential runs, including Beyonce, Jay-Z and Bruce Springsteen.

While their focus is usually on presidential races, the groups’s uphill task ahead of 2016 is getting youth involved in the elections happening this year.

Of likely midterm voters ages 18-29, 44 percent of Mitt Romney supporters in 2012 plan to vote this year compared to 35 percent of Obama voters, according to another Harvard Institute of Politics survey.

Still, in an election with Senate control up for grabs, Republicans are unlikely to see much of a bump from young voters-- less than one in four (23 percent) will "definitely" be voting in November, according to the spring poll.

That's the case in other surveys, too. While 72 percent of those 18-31 said they would "definitely" or "probably" vote in the 2016 presidential election, less than half-- 49 percent-- said they were likely to vote in the upcoming midterms, according to a poll from Democratic pollster Paul Harstad in early spring.

During every election, it's important to use cultural leaders to get young voters interested in the issues, said Ashley Spillane, president of Rock the Vote.

Celebrities, artists and musicians help draw young voters interested in other issues, Spillane said, such as voter ID laws, women's health and college affordability… big push for the youth vote will be National Voter Registration Day on Sept. 23. The day, which started in 2012, became a holiday when the National Association of Secretaries of State designated the fourth Tuesday each September through 2019.

A few days before that, Grayson will be rallying progressives in Los Angeles-- along with local political leaders Xavier Becerra, Judy Chu, Karen Bass, Janice Hahn, Ted Lieu, Alan Lowenthal, Linda Sanchez and Marianne Williamson-- to the sounds of one of the hottest new up and comers, Dan Godlin. Don't know him yet? You will...