This could be the benefit of lead-paint abatement: smarter kids.

... the even better news? There's a good chance it means an even bigger advantage in 2012 and beyond.

Provided that between now & then a Democrat doesn't do something ridiculously stupid like, oh, say, nuke Iran. What's the point of trading in one hyper aggressive administration for another?

In 1972 I knew that McGovern's ass was cooked after a poll taken at the University of Wisconsin, Mad City, came out only 70% McGovern, 30% Nixon.

The sick twist is this: if McCain wins that gap is almost certain to grow. In a sense, a democratic loss in 2008 might insure democratic dominance for a subsequent generation.

This is one of the benefits of Obama in the race. He encouraged young voters to vote for him and they have in large numbers.

In the general election, this would have tremendous effects on downticket races where local Democratic candidates could win in states and regions they have never won before via Obama and Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. But if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, these young voters would likely stay home because they aren't going to vote for the same old tired politics. This would result in Republicans winning many races which they would've lost if Obama was the nominee.

And the even better news? There's a good chance it means an even bigger advantage in 2012 and beyond.

... Assuming, of course, that the Democratic party doesn't throw away this advantage by, say, denying the nomination to the candidate who connects most with young voters.

Yeah, but do those kids actually vote. Or just say that they will.

The Republicans had their way for many years and the results are a disaster.

If Obama does not get the nomination they will stay home and pout.

I'm with Kevin. Bush gets at least as much credit as Obama does for all the young voters flocking to the Democratic Party.

Wouldn't be surprised, either, if there's a subset of newly politically engaged young women excited about Clinton.

Wouldn't be surprised, either, if there's a subset of newly politically engaged young women excited about Clinton.

I can vouch for this. I raised two of them. My son as well. He was the one who got his sisters involved.

There is a small group of people who like Clinton, but it is very small indeed and almost entirely the result of those peoples PARENTS preferring Clinton.

Clinton has spit on our tastes in music. She has scapegoated the videogames we play. She has mocked our films and our culture. There are very few of us who think she's acceptable. You may as well be electing the moralizing Joe Lieberman for all that we're concerned.

But enjoy the 'pouting' comments when you have to endure 4 more years of John McCain just so you could stick it to young people and nominate someone you knew we could never support. You can't very well ask us to vote for someone who hates us.

There is a small group of people who like Clinton, but it is very small indeed and almost entirely the result of those peoples PARENTS preferring Clinton.

That would be an interesting thing to measure.

Clinton has spit on our tastes in music. -soullite

What? Care to give a concrete example?

I'm cross posting a post I made on http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15372.html that is on this same subject... hopefully someone finds it interesting. I'm not sure what age group is most prevalent on these blogs.

---

In case anyone is interested in a personal story, I’m in the latter end of that age group (18-29) and these articles exactly describe what happened with me.

2000 was the first presidential election I was able to vote in. At the time I was very politically immature and went mainly off of what my parents (ardent Republicans) and their news sources (conservative talk radio) said. I had only superficial knowledge and I voted for Bush over Gore due to being sick of the dishonesty of the Clintons and wanting change. Yes I am kind of ashamed of this now ;)

It was in the run up to the Iraq war where my support for George W. Bush ended. I saw through his lawyerly speech that he didn’t really believe what he was saying and didn’t see going to war with Iraq as a good idea. Over the next couple of years I went from being unsupportive to being completely appalled by how dishonest and brazenly incompetent (and unconcerned about it) the running of this country became, due to everything being hyper politicized.

Now here I am. I have a yearning for the middle road (which is much closer to blue than red right now) and see the Republicans as having become thoroughly corrupted by power. It’s time for change and I think that all three candidates are great compared to Bush (though McCain’s turn into Bush 2.0 has disqualified him completely) and I’m a strong Obama supporter. I don’t ever expect to identify as a Republican again regardless of my sympathy for some goals conservatives had before coming into power (states rights, less federal spending, 2nd amendment support, less corruption, hah). The only way I will go back is if Democrats come into power and it corrupts them as thoroughly… though it is hard to imagine them being able to compare with Dubya/Cheney/Rove…

Btw, the status of my “ardent Republican� parents. Both of them still hate Hillary Clinton regardless of whether Bill Kristol and Limbaugh love her now or not. I brought my mother over to be an Obama supporter (Republicans for Obama, the message of cross-party appeals to her) and she has been cheering him on since he pulled out a win in Iowa. My father is now a “conservative� not a Republican and is thoroughly disenchanted by the Republican party by doing nothing really “conservative� with their power and by some of the leaders supporting illegal immigration.

Net tally:
+2 for Democrats
-3 for Republicans

I know Hillary supporters who are about my age (mid to late twenties). They're utterly clueless. The only reasons they cite for supporting Hillary is that she's a woman and some vague mumble jumble about her "experience." When I ask why I should support a woman who voted for War on Iraq and never repetented, they get a deer in headlight look and mumble something about "she wouldn't really do that, she's a woman."

Sometimes I wish natural selection would act faster, so that either these foolz wouldn't be around or I won't. I don't care which, just get me away from these retards.

Wouldn't be surprised, either, if there's a subset of newly politically engaged young women excited about Clinton.

I can vouch for this. I raised two of them. My son as well. He was the one who got his sisters involved.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State

Sorry to hear about your girls, it is a shame they do not seek to emulate a strong woman with enough guts to stand on her own two feet and leave a continually cheating spouse.

Girl,
You have my complete approval to go ahead and blow JoeSixPack out of the water with your shotgun.

Clinton has spit on our tastes in music. She has scapegoated the videogames we play. She has mocked our films and our culture.

And these are all the most important issues facing us today, aren't they? Is suppose McCain is down with the boys, huh?

Grow up. I almost wish I was temporarily unemployed so I'd have more time to deconstruct this nonsense.

Thersites,
Of course music and video games are the most pressing issues facing this nation today! What, are you some old coot who worries about pesky things like recession and plunging stock market and credit shortages and what not. Get a life man, get an Ipod.

Weenie,
Already got me a second life.

Hey, where's lunch, anyway?

Hm. I see the tone, thoughtfulness and content of discussion here is much the same as elsewhere. Might as well turn MSNBC back on...

That should have been Second Life(tm)

BTW, I did some research and learned that McCain is a bigger Beatles fan than Hillary or Obama, so it's time to bid a fond adieu to my Democratic friends.

...they get a deer in headlight look and mumble something about "she wouldn't really do that, she's a woman."

Same conversation every time I talk to Democratic women here in Maine about Susan Collins and her reliable support of Junta Boy, his Mesopotamian adventure, and every other major GOP policy prescription, save abortion.

Kevin writes:

Via Mori Dinauer, who suggests that this means at least an extra million votes for the Democratic candidate in November.

They'll need it, especially now that the Supreme Court has given the go-ahead for modern-day poll taxes.

You're assuming that we'll have free and fair elections as of 1012, which is not all that likely if McCain gets to appoint the next supreme court justice.

To paraphrase, "don't go counting those Democratic votes before they're cast.

thersites: And these are all the most important issues facing us today, aren't they? Is suppose McCain is down with the boys, huh?

So people should only be concerned about the things you think they should? Everyone should be concerned about the same things?

Culture matters. Privacy and individual rights matter. Censorship is an problem that matters. Just because they don't strike you as important as taxes and war doesn't mean you have the right to chastise someone for caring about them.

What's more, it's incredibly, incredibly foolish. People become interested in politics when they see how it is affecting something they care about. For some young people, that's music, video games, the internet. I started paying attention to politics when I researched John Ashcroft's efforts to censor video games. That was the beginning. Many of my friends continue to despise Clinton because they see in her Big Brother/the Nanny State/the Church attempting to tell them how to live their lives.

Grow up.

Considering the topic... absurd.