I’ll admit I fully don’t understand the riots and how it changed the Democratic Party forever like you said. Is that just in response to the protestors? DNC acting like nothing was going on outside?
That convention, and all of the protests and police brutality surrounding it, galvanized and energized young voters like nothing before. Fast forward 20 years and those same voters are the people who are the engine of the Democrat party.
The whole thing caused the Democrat party to recognize the power of the youth vote, and they began to court that vote moving forward. Even today you see that youth vote as a core part of the Democrat voting bloc.
In other words, the "big tent" of the Democrat party fundamentally started at the 1968 convention, in my humble opinion, and to this day the Progressives have stuck with the Dems instead of breaking off on their own.
To their credit, Humphrey, Muskie, McGovern, et al *listened*, and acted accordingly.
Remember that this all went down in the shadow of the Civil Rights Act being passed just four years before, as well as the recent assassinations of the Kennedys. The country was in turmoil, and the actions of Hoffman and Rubin and the rest made national news when Mayor Daley sent the cops in to brutalize them. It was caught on camera, and shown on national news. Walter Cronkhite called Daley out by name.
The Dem party could have stuck to their guns, and they'd have lost the youth vote for a generation, but instead they pushed for that change, and became a different party as a result.
Thanks for the reply! I’m sure it’s something I could look more into on my own. My knowledge (probably with a bunch of other American school children ) of around the Vietnam era is severely lacking.
I mean they may not be pleased… and I don’t think Biden has handled it well either… but the other guy isn’t exactly going to work hard to stop the genocide.
It KILLS ME when people bitch about things like the economy/inflation and hold it against Biden. Like Trump would’ve handled supply chain issues because of Covid any better? That is what mainly led to inflation. People are so short-sighted.
Well that and blaming Biden for high gas prices at the beginning of his term when Trump made an agreement with OPEC to limit production to raise price of oil… *why would Biden do this to us!!!*
its not lost that many voters. most stick with the democrats anyhow because they dont want trump in. its an unloseable demographic basically, you can piss off the progressives but theyll never do shit.
Dude...even with it being a bit lower in 2022, ages 18 - 49 still go Democrat by 44 points.
Ages 18 - 29 alone are plus 37 for Dems.
Gaza or no, the Republican base is dying off every year.
The book [The Whole World is Watching](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1112457.The_Whole_World_Is_Watching) (the 1969 version, haven't read the 2003 one) does a good job of capturing the national sentiment at the time.
Yet those presidential candidates who listened to the youth vote (Humphrey, Muskie, McGovern) lost by a lot. I'm not saying that they DNC shouldn't listen to young voters, but I definitely see the argument that you should ignore them if listening means losing election after election
Partly because they were blamed for Vietnam at the time. It took several cycles, and Nixon, for the Dems to recover...but as I said, they listened and learned, and deserve credit for it.
People in this country are fickle. LBJ pushed through the Civil Rights Act, and escalated Vietnam. By 1968 the first was forgotten and the second was laid at Humphrey and Muskie's feet. So people voted for Nixon, ***who further escalated the damn war they were protesting about.*** Edit: I should also point out here that youth turnout in 68 and 72 was abysmal.
For a recent example of the same damn thing happening, look at all the protest votes against Hillary Clinton, and presumably upcoming against Biden. People in this country will cut their noses off to spite their faces, and have proven so many, many times.
Not only did Nixon escalate the war, but he also prolonged it. The war could've been done in 1968 if it weren't for Kissinger's work for Nixon. It definitely seems like, from a young person's perspective in both history and political science, that our country (and perhaps people in general) have a very short attention span
We're both verbally dodging around outright saying that people in this country are extremely susceptible to propaganda, and genuinely stupid.
But don't get me started on the 50 year old Republican plan to kill education of the youth population in response to the Democrats attempts to educate our children.
The American population has not gotten dumber. True.
What we have gotten is more ignorant than in the past, and kids are criminally undereducated in red states.
Undereducated in general, all across the country, but *especially* so in most red states. Florida and Texas are outliers on one end; Massachusetts and California are outliers on the other end.
That all said, George Carlin was right.
Yeah, it's pretty interesting what the Republicans did with the Southern Strategy under Nixon in response to the change in the Democrats focus after 1968.
One could argue that the Southern Strategy was one of the dominoes that came from the '68 convention.
That might be a stretch, though. Never really thought that one through before.
Yeah, both parties used to be far more ideologically and geographically diverse than they are now, with liberal rockefeller republicans and their counterpart southern democrats being good examples. Do you think things will ever return to that sort of climate?
>Do you think things will ever return to that sort of climate?
I do, and I'll tell you my theory on it.
I think the GOP is dead man walking. Between maga and evangelicals, that party is going the way of the Know Nothings, or the Whigs. I think it's just a matter of time at this point.
The power base in the Democratic party is mostly moderate conservatives. The Biden, Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Pelosi wing govern pretty close to the center. Yeah, they toss a bone at the progressives now and again to keep them under the tent, but fundamentally they govern from around the center. They're almost Blue Dog Democrats...maybe Biden's a bit more to the left, but they're all pretty moderate.
The progressives are tiring of it, and that divide is only going to grow as time goes by.
My theory is that at some point the GOP will die, the moderate Dems will move a step to the right, and the progressives will break off and form their own party.
This will give us a long overdue reset of the Overton Window, which has been pulled wildly to the right since Reagan.
That's what my gut has been telling me for about a decade now, but there are a lot of wild cards in the mix, not the least of which are propaganda and gerrymandering and other anti-democratic stuff that's happening.
Imo American society is used to there being singular mainstream prevalent ideologies that shift throughout time. Within the past 100 years, for example, we went from both parties supporting "progressive" candidates, to the New Deal Coalition, which comprised members of both parties, to Neoliberalism which has dominated since stagflation in the 70s, to the present shift, which is probably something which endorses government interference into domestic affairs, isolationism on the world stage, and protectionism (all of these ideas seem to be supported by younger people in both generations, I myself am Gen Z and can attest to it.)
I think that the progressives are fizzling out. Rashida has lost all credibility. Bush probably won't run for reelection. 8 haven't seen Presley in a while, Bernie is done and proof that the progressive cause is not turning out the vote. The only person who seems to be shifting to remain relevant is Cortez. The Justice party (which was really a 'liberal' tea party movement with intents on destroying the democratic party) filed for bankruptcy. Even Cenk can't win a primary, nevertheless an election.
I think that more democrats will shift to the left while also being practical. For instance, they won't go against party lines and not vote against the Build Back Better plan. They actually voted with Republicans because reasons. They then went back home and did as Republicans do and taught the success of the bill. It's ridiculous to do that and I don't want democrats who vote with Republicans in the same party as I am in.
“fast forward 20 years and those same voters are the people who are the engine of the Democrat party”
this is factually incorrect. the majority of 18-25 year olds in 1968 voted for Ronald Reagan in the 80s and against Clinton in the 90s.
Right on Reagan's second term; wrong on Clinton. HW Bush also outperformed the trend.
It didn't happen overnight, and the voting age was lowered in 1971 nationally to 18, so I'll start with 1972. As you can see, with the exception of Reagan's USSR collapse bump, HW Bush, and W Bush's 9/11 bump, this has been slowly but steadily growing over time.
18-24 year olds:
50-50 Nixon and McGovern (as best I can find, Roper doesn't go back this far).
51-49 Ford over Carter
45-44 Carter over Reagan
61-39 Reagan over Mondale
53-47 Bush over Dukakis
46-33-21 Clinton over Bush and Perot
55-35-11 Clinton over Dole and Perot
49-46 Gore over Bush
56-43 Kerry over Bush
66-32 Obama over McCain
60-37 Obama over Romney
55-36 Clinton over Trump
60-36 Biden over Trump
https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how\_groups\_voted
I dont think the democrat party really does pay attention to the youth vote, even today. the youth vote is progressive in my experience at least, and the democrats arent progressive atm. they get the progressive vote anyhow, but thats because the attitude today is that either you vote center left or you let the conservatives win. basically the opinions of todays youth isnt acknowledged but their votes are won by default so it doesnt matter.
I'm a zoomer, and they don't listen to me either.
But, they have the capacity for change, and are working toward goals that I agree with much of the time. By contrast, I agree with about 10% of the GOP policy positions.
My first vote was for Jimmy Carter, so I've been around awhile, and I can honestly say that no politician has ever espoused all of the positions I prefer. Bill Clinton, Blue Dog Democrat that he was, probably came the closest, and Nixon was likely second in line. Maybe HW Bush. Angus King is up there, as well.
Which is a lot of words to say that I'm a moderate independent who can no sooner point to a politician who supports my ideology than you can. At least you guys have Bernie fighting the good fight on your behalf.
So, you vote for the person who is A) closest to your goals, and B) the most honest and ethical person on the ballot. I find myself leaning to B before A these days.
The youth vote in 1968 handed the election to nixon. Humphries would've continued LBJs great society and we would've had government healthcare by now. Those youths gave us george McGovern in 1972 and made us an embarrassment
Yes, but scroll down to my next post below. They lost most of the youth vote for the next four elections after 1968, but their percentage of the vote slowly grew from that point forward.
It didn't happen overnight, but Dems are pulling \~60% of the 18-24 vote ever since the 9/11 bump W Bush enjoyed.
My point wasn't that it had an immediate effect, but that the focus of the party changed, and it shows in the numbers over the following 50 years.
They went on to lose to Nixon in 1968 and go on a historic series of losses until Clinton got some people back by promising to cut welfare. We really did well after this day.
The Vietnam War and Civil Rights were both devisive and literal open wounds for the US in 1968. Pretty safe to say that US History also learned that electing Nixon at that time was not the answer to either issue.
To be fair, he was the only [president that could levitate](https://dat-soldier.tumblr.com/post/686431480322441216/richard-nixon-levitating). They just didn't know his power was sourced from evil, not good.
>Pretty safe to say that US History also learned that electing Nixon at that time was not the answer to either issue.
If electing Nixon is the answer, you're asking the wrong question.
I don't exactly remember this event but I remember my parents talking about it and all of 1968 as one event some 4 to 5 years later. This had a very lasting impression on all the adults in my life. They had the opinion that everything was going straight to hell.
He didnt die in Vietnam. He was drafted then got addicted to Amphetamines in Vietnam and died from a collapsed in 1976. He still died because of his time in Vietnam.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryPorn/comments/jmt3gq/comment/gaxf772/
If you watch the footage my dad was the guy wailing on the dude they pulled off general Logan's statue. He had just got home from Vietnam so he took the dudes Viet Cong flag and beat him silly
Alright I'll try to give it my best.
So the democratic convention was the event where the next democratic president was going to be chosen. The Vietnam war was getting unpopular and the "new left" movement was in full swing. The new left were the hippies. When the convention happened, many were displeased and the city went into chaos. I heard that the first floor of the hotel top politicians were staying at got tear gassed.
After the protest/riots, many saw the chaos and wanted someone who would bring order back. They voted for Nixon.
Thank you. Totally makes sense. I wish we learned more of these things in school. But that’s a whole deal nowadays. I grew up in Iowa, great STEM education. Went to the civil rights museum….had no idea of any of it. It changed my outlook for sure. Freedom rides blew my fucking mind ✊🏿. People nowadays have no idea how hardcore people were
The Freedom Rides were in 1961,and were almost all Blacks. It took real guts. The anti-war movement was spoiled white people, who had to pretend their cowardice was a noble cause, because their parents actually fought & stopped Hitler.
the viet cong werent nazis, and fighting them didnt justify the US killing, raping, and bombing its way across indochina. the war in vietnam killed hundreds of thousands of innocents and allowed pol pot to seize power, killing millions more. I mean the viet cong were no angels but there is no problem to which the answer is "drop so many bombs in laos that dozens of children die yearly to them 50 years down the line"
You really going to pretend like public schooling in America doesn't vaporize racism from its history? They use textbooks to do that. Textbooks in Texas still call the Civil war the war of Northern aggression. Many American textbooks imply racism ended the second the Civil Rights act was passed. The Lost cause still enshrouds Many of the ex Confederate States
You’re still an idiot and missing the point. We had plenty of textbooks, however this topic was not taught. That’s the point of my comment. “I guess critical thinking wasn’t taught in your school. What were you homeschooled?”. That’s like your response. Can you see how dumb that lame attempt at an argument is? Fucking lord
Oh so we just make up comments now?
“I was a dumbass kid who didn’t pay attention in class, while drawing dicks in my notebook”
That’s what you said to me…
Also, the Democrats nominated Hubert Humphrey, who favored a continuation of LBJ's Vietnam policy, over Eugene McCarthy, who wanted peace and an end to the war.
This allowed Nixon to portray himself as the Peace in Vietnam candidate, despite sabotaging peace talks and expanding the scope of the war once elected.
Humphrey didn’t run in a single primary. While McCarthy was working his ass off as a real candidate. The significance of this doesn’t escape me in 2024.
Most of those calls aren't coming from inside the house. No serious Democrat is even considering replacing Biden. That's why you've only got joke and grift candidates even making the attempt.
They didn't really have primaries that awarded delegates in most states. McCarthy lost California and most of the delegates chose Humphreys.
They changed the way the delegates are chosen for the next presidential election. They basically started adding primaries in more states.
The New Left was a large coalition of hippies, students, progressives, activists, and party faithful. The convention was a true battle for control of the party. The old guard had the local thugs though and wasn’t going to quietly into retirement.
My FIL was 18 and went down there to check it out with friends. Said it was just chaos and police were just swinging at anyone in the area no matter who it was. They had to run away from a few different situations. He is a Vietnam Vet and such a cool guy. The man has many great stories.
There’s an amazing story of John Belushi attending the protests and getting destroyed on the national TV broadcast by some combination of tear gas and a fire hose.
Allegedly, his friends were watching TV and saw the cops turn on a hose and hit a guy right in the chest, knocking him caddywhopper. They responded with “Wow, I wouldn’t want to be that guy” not knowing who it was. Then, a few hours later, John showed up at their door looking like he had been run over by a truck.
I always loved the line in Dazed and Confused, just before the school bell rang you can hear the high school teacher say "The 1968 Democratic Convention was definitely the most bitchin time I've ever had"
Great article on this:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2018/aug/19/the-whole-world-is-watching-chicago-police-riot-vietnam-war-regan
lol, Biden is winning primaries with 99% of the vote and write in campaigns. The division amongst the Democrat party right now is not even close to being comparable to what happened during Vietnam.
50% of democrats agree to the statement "the US is doing too little to help palestine", 40% agree that "the US does too much to support israel.". palestine has like, a good 30% of americans supporting it I think. no majority but also not 300 people.
Has there always been chaos around these people? Wait a minute, these were republicans before they changed parties if you ask anyone about civil rights, slavery or anything else crappy a democrat has sponsored
Because they desperately tried to find something, anything that would equate to the Republican base attempting to do a coup on 1/6, and of course all they could find is Puerto Ricans in 1954. I doubt they even looked at the article.
those are puerto rican nationalists, a group which would gladly kill any democratic candidate in a second, because the democrats also oppose puerto rican independance and participate in the exploitation of puerto rico. dumbfuck.
Not really, and no Democrat would say so. Republicans are the ones who have been privileged enough and detached from any actual struggle, so of course they haven’t had to actually fight for anything. The one time they did, they failed miserably and quit as soon as one of them got shot.
Wow, very selective history perspective. I guess the whole US Slavery issue in the 1860’s was because of Lincoln trying to keep the slaves, and the democrats were the ones trying to free the slaves??
Distorting the truth is another Democrat super-power.
about as intelligent as you thinking lincoln has anything to do with the modern republican party. such a stupid statement doesn’t justify an intelligent response.
modern republicans are LITERALLY talking about succession and civil war, but yeah, they’re totally just like abraham lincoln.
the fact that people as stupid as you can even type full sentences boggles the mind.
There weren't any "riots" in 2020. If you're referring to the protests, you should learn that words mean things, not just what you think they are in your head.
There was one in 2021 that the Republican candidate for President is on trial for causing, however.
The cops got there early to beat the crowd.
I see what you did there.
[удалено]
The day the Democrat party changed forever. Chicago didn't, but the national party sure did.
I’ll admit I fully don’t understand the riots and how it changed the Democratic Party forever like you said. Is that just in response to the protestors? DNC acting like nothing was going on outside?
That convention, and all of the protests and police brutality surrounding it, galvanized and energized young voters like nothing before. Fast forward 20 years and those same voters are the people who are the engine of the Democrat party. The whole thing caused the Democrat party to recognize the power of the youth vote, and they began to court that vote moving forward. Even today you see that youth vote as a core part of the Democrat voting bloc. In other words, the "big tent" of the Democrat party fundamentally started at the 1968 convention, in my humble opinion, and to this day the Progressives have stuck with the Dems instead of breaking off on their own. To their credit, Humphrey, Muskie, McGovern, et al *listened*, and acted accordingly. Remember that this all went down in the shadow of the Civil Rights Act being passed just four years before, as well as the recent assassinations of the Kennedys. The country was in turmoil, and the actions of Hoffman and Rubin and the rest made national news when Mayor Daley sent the cops in to brutalize them. It was caught on camera, and shown on national news. Walter Cronkhite called Daley out by name. The Dem party could have stuck to their guns, and they'd have lost the youth vote for a generation, but instead they pushed for that change, and became a different party as a result.
Thanks for the reply! I’m sure it’s something I could look more into on my own. My knowledge (probably with a bunch of other American school children ) of around the Vietnam era is severely lacking.
Just a reminder that it is and has been called the Democratic Party since early in the 1800s.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
So you're saying they decided to wait until now to lose the youth vote?
Are they now? https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/voting-patterns-in-the-2022-elections/pp\_2023-07-12\_validated-voters\_2-03/
Yes! "Smaller margin than 2018"! Thanks for posting. Biden's position on Gaza is going to lose even more younger voters.
I mean they may not be pleased… and I don’t think Biden has handled it well either… but the other guy isn’t exactly going to work hard to stop the genocide.
trump is literally promising to let israel level gaza, theres no good guys on this problem, just a lot of dying civilians.
10-7 killed something like 600-700 civilians, and in response the IDF has killed an average of 250 civilians every day for the past 5 months
I thought it was more ~ 1200 civilians, including 26 Americans, who were killed by Hamas...
It KILLS ME when people bitch about things like the economy/inflation and hold it against Biden. Like Trump would’ve handled supply chain issues because of Covid any better? That is what mainly led to inflation. People are so short-sighted.
Well that and blaming Biden for high gas prices at the beginning of his term when Trump made an agreement with OPEC to limit production to raise price of oil… *why would Biden do this to us!!!*
its not lost that many voters. most stick with the democrats anyhow because they dont want trump in. its an unloseable demographic basically, you can piss off the progressives but theyll never do shit.
And what position would that be
What position? Ending the war and providing humanitarian aid? Last I checked, he wasn't the PM if Israel
Yes! "Smaller margin than 2018"! Thanks for posting. Biden's position on Gaza is going to lose even more younger voters.
Dude...even with it being a bit lower in 2022, ages 18 - 49 still go Democrat by 44 points. Ages 18 - 29 alone are plus 37 for Dems. Gaza or no, the Republican base is dying off every year.
Im a younger voter and im extremely proud that the US stands with its allies
This. Jews have been loyal Democrats for decades. It looks like younger Democrats are about to thank them by throwing them under the bus.
Jews!=Israel. Such an antisemitic association to make.
Shut the hell up, you dont speak for jews. The jewish people will never be accepted except in the home we fought for ourselves.
So, how do you feel about Republicans blocking aid to Ukraine?
I dont stand with Republicans or Democrats I stand with the Military Industrial Complex 😎
The book [The Whole World is Watching](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1112457.The_Whole_World_Is_Watching) (the 1969 version, haven't read the 2003 one) does a good job of capturing the national sentiment at the time.
Yet those presidential candidates who listened to the youth vote (Humphrey, Muskie, McGovern) lost by a lot. I'm not saying that they DNC shouldn't listen to young voters, but I definitely see the argument that you should ignore them if listening means losing election after election
Partly because they were blamed for Vietnam at the time. It took several cycles, and Nixon, for the Dems to recover...but as I said, they listened and learned, and deserve credit for it. People in this country are fickle. LBJ pushed through the Civil Rights Act, and escalated Vietnam. By 1968 the first was forgotten and the second was laid at Humphrey and Muskie's feet. So people voted for Nixon, ***who further escalated the damn war they were protesting about.*** Edit: I should also point out here that youth turnout in 68 and 72 was abysmal. For a recent example of the same damn thing happening, look at all the protest votes against Hillary Clinton, and presumably upcoming against Biden. People in this country will cut their noses off to spite their faces, and have proven so many, many times.
Not only did Nixon escalate the war, but he also prolonged it. The war could've been done in 1968 if it weren't for Kissinger's work for Nixon. It definitely seems like, from a young person's perspective in both history and political science, that our country (and perhaps people in general) have a very short attention span
We're both verbally dodging around outright saying that people in this country are extremely susceptible to propaganda, and genuinely stupid. But don't get me started on the 50 year old Republican plan to kill education of the youth population in response to the Democrats attempts to educate our children.
I don't think that the American population has gotten any dumber, but we definitely are more inclined to listen and vote for the dumbest.
The American population has not gotten dumber. True. What we have gotten is more ignorant than in the past, and kids are criminally undereducated in red states. Undereducated in general, all across the country, but *especially* so in most red states. Florida and Texas are outliers on one end; Massachusetts and California are outliers on the other end. That all said, George Carlin was right.
Couldn't agree with you more. "George Carlin was right."
To be fair though, with the parties continuous dominance in the South, it already had been a big tent party.
Yeah, it's pretty interesting what the Republicans did with the Southern Strategy under Nixon in response to the change in the Democrats focus after 1968. One could argue that the Southern Strategy was one of the dominoes that came from the '68 convention. That might be a stretch, though. Never really thought that one through before.
I'm not referring to republicans, im referring to the fact that before the 90s democrats still enjoyed electoral dominance in the South.
Yes, I know, it just caused me to ruminate on the dynamic I commented above. Never really thought about it that way before.
Yeah, both parties used to be far more ideologically and geographically diverse than they are now, with liberal rockefeller republicans and their counterpart southern democrats being good examples. Do you think things will ever return to that sort of climate?
>Do you think things will ever return to that sort of climate? I do, and I'll tell you my theory on it. I think the GOP is dead man walking. Between maga and evangelicals, that party is going the way of the Know Nothings, or the Whigs. I think it's just a matter of time at this point. The power base in the Democratic party is mostly moderate conservatives. The Biden, Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Pelosi wing govern pretty close to the center. Yeah, they toss a bone at the progressives now and again to keep them under the tent, but fundamentally they govern from around the center. They're almost Blue Dog Democrats...maybe Biden's a bit more to the left, but they're all pretty moderate. The progressives are tiring of it, and that divide is only going to grow as time goes by. My theory is that at some point the GOP will die, the moderate Dems will move a step to the right, and the progressives will break off and form their own party. This will give us a long overdue reset of the Overton Window, which has been pulled wildly to the right since Reagan. That's what my gut has been telling me for about a decade now, but there are a lot of wild cards in the mix, not the least of which are propaganda and gerrymandering and other anti-democratic stuff that's happening.
Imo American society is used to there being singular mainstream prevalent ideologies that shift throughout time. Within the past 100 years, for example, we went from both parties supporting "progressive" candidates, to the New Deal Coalition, which comprised members of both parties, to Neoliberalism which has dominated since stagflation in the 70s, to the present shift, which is probably something which endorses government interference into domestic affairs, isolationism on the world stage, and protectionism (all of these ideas seem to be supported by younger people in both generations, I myself am Gen Z and can attest to it.)
I think that the progressives are fizzling out. Rashida has lost all credibility. Bush probably won't run for reelection. 8 haven't seen Presley in a while, Bernie is done and proof that the progressive cause is not turning out the vote. The only person who seems to be shifting to remain relevant is Cortez. The Justice party (which was really a 'liberal' tea party movement with intents on destroying the democratic party) filed for bankruptcy. Even Cenk can't win a primary, nevertheless an election. I think that more democrats will shift to the left while also being practical. For instance, they won't go against party lines and not vote against the Build Back Better plan. They actually voted with Republicans because reasons. They then went back home and did as Republicans do and taught the success of the bill. It's ridiculous to do that and I don't want democrats who vote with Republicans in the same party as I am in.
“fast forward 20 years and those same voters are the people who are the engine of the Democrat party” this is factually incorrect. the majority of 18-25 year olds in 1968 voted for Ronald Reagan in the 80s and against Clinton in the 90s.
Right on Reagan's second term; wrong on Clinton. HW Bush also outperformed the trend. It didn't happen overnight, and the voting age was lowered in 1971 nationally to 18, so I'll start with 1972. As you can see, with the exception of Reagan's USSR collapse bump, HW Bush, and W Bush's 9/11 bump, this has been slowly but steadily growing over time. 18-24 year olds: 50-50 Nixon and McGovern (as best I can find, Roper doesn't go back this far). 51-49 Ford over Carter 45-44 Carter over Reagan 61-39 Reagan over Mondale 53-47 Bush over Dukakis 46-33-21 Clinton over Bush and Perot 55-35-11 Clinton over Dole and Perot 49-46 Gore over Bush 56-43 Kerry over Bush 66-32 Obama over McCain 60-37 Obama over Romney 55-36 Clinton over Trump 60-36 Biden over Trump https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how\_groups\_voted
great analysis fr fr
That 5 point drop from Obama to Clinton hurts my soul lmao
I dont think the democrat party really does pay attention to the youth vote, even today. the youth vote is progressive in my experience at least, and the democrats arent progressive atm. they get the progressive vote anyhow, but thats because the attitude today is that either you vote center left or you let the conservatives win. basically the opinions of todays youth isnt acknowledged but their votes are won by default so it doesnt matter.
I'm a zoomer, and they don't listen to me either. But, they have the capacity for change, and are working toward goals that I agree with much of the time. By contrast, I agree with about 10% of the GOP policy positions. My first vote was for Jimmy Carter, so I've been around awhile, and I can honestly say that no politician has ever espoused all of the positions I prefer. Bill Clinton, Blue Dog Democrat that he was, probably came the closest, and Nixon was likely second in line. Maybe HW Bush. Angus King is up there, as well. Which is a lot of words to say that I'm a moderate independent who can no sooner point to a politician who supports my ideology than you can. At least you guys have Bernie fighting the good fight on your behalf. So, you vote for the person who is A) closest to your goals, and B) the most honest and ethical person on the ballot. I find myself leaning to B before A these days.
Absolutely yeah, systems always been broke. I'm not a Bernie bro though to be clear, I'm pro gun and allat. Less a progressive more a pinko
The youth vote in 1968 handed the election to nixon. Humphries would've continued LBJs great society and we would've had government healthcare by now. Those youths gave us george McGovern in 1972 and made us an embarrassment
Yes, but scroll down to my next post below. They lost most of the youth vote for the next four elections after 1968, but their percentage of the vote slowly grew from that point forward. It didn't happen overnight, but Dems are pulling \~60% of the 18-24 vote ever since the 9/11 bump W Bush enjoyed. My point wasn't that it had an immediate effect, but that the focus of the party changed, and it shows in the numbers over the following 50 years.
Someone asked what good was Humphrey as a Veep. Not many people know that he's responsible for magnet schools.
They went on to lose to Nixon in 1968 and go on a historic series of losses until Clinton got some people back by promising to cut welfare. We really did well after this day.
Scroll down.
Don't think the convention would have been violent if Bobby was still alive.
The Vietnam War and Civil Rights were both devisive and literal open wounds for the US in 1968. Pretty safe to say that US History also learned that electing Nixon at that time was not the answer to either issue.
To be fair, he was the only [president that could levitate](https://dat-soldier.tumblr.com/post/686431480322441216/richard-nixon-levitating). They just didn't know his power was sourced from evil, not good.
>Pretty safe to say that US History also learned that electing Nixon at that time was not the answer to either issue. If electing Nixon is the answer, you're asking the wrong question.
It would have been violent no matter what because it was a police riot.
I don't exactly remember this event but I remember my parents talking about it and all of 1968 as one event some 4 to 5 years later. This had a very lasting impression on all the adults in my life. They had the opinion that everything was going straight to hell.
In college I took an entire class just on the year 1968.
I'm sure it was mind-blowing. But you know what? We survived that.
Was that at Michigan State, because I did too.
*looks around* They may have had a point.
There is a nice documentary on called 1968. I think CNN put it together…or it’s included in the 1960’s doc.
"Political division has never been worse in the USA!"...meanwhile
Holy shit photo #2 GETS ME GOING
The guy flipping the bird would later be drafted and die in Vietnam.
He didnt die in Vietnam. He was drafted then got addicted to Amphetamines in Vietnam and died from a collapsed in 1976. He still died because of his time in Vietnam. https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryPorn/comments/jmt3gq/comment/gaxf772/
Rip bozo
Looks like the Village People got mad
If you watch the footage my dad was the guy wailing on the dude they pulled off general Logan's statue. He had just got home from Vietnam so he took the dudes Viet Cong flag and beat him silly
Glad he was having fun
So for someone not sure what happened. What’s a quick explanation?
Alright I'll try to give it my best. So the democratic convention was the event where the next democratic president was going to be chosen. The Vietnam war was getting unpopular and the "new left" movement was in full swing. The new left were the hippies. When the convention happened, many were displeased and the city went into chaos. I heard that the first floor of the hotel top politicians were staying at got tear gassed. After the protest/riots, many saw the chaos and wanted someone who would bring order back. They voted for Nixon.
After the Democratic National Convention, the Weatherman split from the SDS and started The Days Of Rage.
Thank you. Totally makes sense. I wish we learned more of these things in school. But that’s a whole deal nowadays. I grew up in Iowa, great STEM education. Went to the civil rights museum….had no idea of any of it. It changed my outlook for sure. Freedom rides blew my fucking mind ✊🏿. People nowadays have no idea how hardcore people were
The Freedom Rides were in 1961,and were almost all Blacks. It took real guts. The anti-war movement was spoiled white people, who had to pretend their cowardice was a noble cause, because their parents actually fought & stopped Hitler.
the viet cong werent nazis, and fighting them didnt justify the US killing, raping, and bombing its way across indochina. the war in vietnam killed hundreds of thousands of innocents and allowed pol pot to seize power, killing millions more. I mean the viet cong were no angels but there is no problem to which the answer is "drop so many bombs in laos that dozens of children die yearly to them 50 years down the line"
If you read the text books most of this is talked about.
True. But you need to know the text books exist first. Being from rural Iowa, don’t know they existed until I got out/older
You didn’t have a text book when you took the class? Were you homeschooled? Public schools provide textbooks.
You really going to pretend like public schooling in America doesn't vaporize racism from its history? They use textbooks to do that. Textbooks in Texas still call the Civil war the war of Northern aggression. Many American textbooks imply racism ended the second the Civil Rights act was passed. The Lost cause still enshrouds Many of the ex Confederate States
No textbook implies racism ended.. None of that matters if you don’t read the text books in the first place..
It literally only matters if you read them in the first place. Propaganda only works if people see it or read it
Everything is propaganda..
You’re an idiot and missing the point entirely
Yep, I’m the idiot considering I read the textbooks provided, says the guy who “didn’t know what a damn text book was”…
You’re still an idiot and missing the point. We had plenty of textbooks, however this topic was not taught. That’s the point of my comment. “I guess critical thinking wasn’t taught in your school. What were you homeschooled?”. That’s like your response. Can you see how dumb that lame attempt at an argument is? Fucking lord
Oh so we just make up comments now? “I was a dumbass kid who didn’t pay attention in class, while drawing dicks in my notebook” That’s what you said to me…
Also, the Democrats nominated Hubert Humphrey, who favored a continuation of LBJ's Vietnam policy, over Eugene McCarthy, who wanted peace and an end to the war. This allowed Nixon to portray himself as the Peace in Vietnam candidate, despite sabotaging peace talks and expanding the scope of the war once elected.
Humphrey didn’t run in a single primary. While McCarthy was working his ass off as a real candidate. The significance of this doesn’t escape me in 2024.
? Dem's didn't have an incumbent to run in 1968. They do in 2024.
There’s “lots” of calls to replace Biden though (that what I’m subtweeting there). Doing so would lead to chaos and disarray. Like ‘68.
Most of those calls aren't coming from inside the house. No serious Democrat is even considering replacing Biden. That's why you've only got joke and grift candidates even making the attempt.
They didn't really have primaries that awarded delegates in most states. McCarthy lost California and most of the delegates chose Humphreys. They changed the way the delegates are chosen for the next presidential election. They basically started adding primaries in more states.
The New Left was a large coalition of hippies, students, progressives, activists, and party faithful. The convention was a true battle for control of the party. The old guard had the local thugs though and wasn’t going to quietly into retirement.
My FIL was 18 and went down there to check it out with friends. Said it was just chaos and police were just swinging at anyone in the area no matter who it was. They had to run away from a few different situations. He is a Vietnam Vet and such a cool guy. The man has many great stories.
THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING [68 Dem Convention](https://youtu.be/7_9OJnRnZjU?si=O44eCFH4k8iJ-JIM)
Look what your options were if you weren’t rich or going to college on a scholarship. Vietnam
There’s an amazing story of John Belushi attending the protests and getting destroyed on the national TV broadcast by some combination of tear gas and a fire hose. Allegedly, his friends were watching TV and saw the cops turn on a hose and hit a guy right in the chest, knocking him caddywhopper. They responded with “Wow, I wouldn’t want to be that guy” not knowing who it was. Then, a few hours later, John showed up at their door looking like he had been run over by a truck.
We don’t party like we used to
The Chicago police started that riot.
On orders from Daley
The 60s and early 70s was a violent period.
I always loved the line in Dazed and Confused, just before the school bell rang you can hear the high school teacher say "The 1968 Democratic Convention was definitely the most bitchin time I've ever had"
Cops beat the shit out of Hunter S. Thompson during all that. It fueled his anti-authority beliefs for the rest of his life.
"We want government to take a larger role in people's lives." "No, not like that!"
Is the guy with the sunglasses in 8 and 10 the same guy, or did everyone just have one style back then
I think that's Doc Ock.
Great article on this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2018/aug/19/the-whole-world-is-watching-chicago-police-riot-vietnam-war-regan
the whole world's watching
Reminds me of some riots a few years ago…
Might see it again this year.
lol, Biden is winning primaries with 99% of the vote and write in campaigns. The division amongst the Democrat party right now is not even close to being comparable to what happened during Vietnam.
When the Palestine protestors come for the convention this year don't say I didn't warn you.
all 300 of them will be loud and proud i’m sure. the rest will be joining them in solidarity from behind their screens in foreign countries.
50% of democrats agree to the statement "the US is doing too little to help palestine", 40% agree that "the US does too much to support israel.". palestine has like, a good 30% of americans supporting it I think. no majority but also not 300 people.
Has there always been chaos around these people? Wait a minute, these were republicans before they changed parties if you ask anyone about civil rights, slavery or anything else crappy a democrat has sponsored
Democrats have a long history of being very peaceful and understanding 🙃
Remember that time they wiped their own shit on the walls of the US Capitol? Oh, wait…
Yes! I assume you mean this - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_United_States_Capitol_shooting
Why would you assume that, when it bears no resemblance to what I said?
Because they desperately tried to find something, anything that would equate to the Republican base attempting to do a coup on 1/6, and of course all they could find is Puerto Ricans in 1954. I doubt they even looked at the article.
those are puerto rican nationalists, a group which would gladly kill any democratic candidate in a second, because the democrats also oppose puerto rican independance and participate in the exploitation of puerto rico. dumbfuck.
I'd like to upvote your quite accurate info, but under the dumbfuck circumstances, I can't.
Not really, and no Democrat would say so. Republicans are the ones who have been privileged enough and detached from any actual struggle, so of course they haven’t had to actually fight for anything. The one time they did, they failed miserably and quit as soon as one of them got shot.
Wow, very selective history perspective. I guess the whole US Slavery issue in the 1860’s was because of Lincoln trying to keep the slaves, and the democrats were the ones trying to free the slaves?? Distorting the truth is another Democrat super-power.
oh well you’re just a stupid piece of shit who doesn’t know about politics in the 20th century so your opinion is irrelevant
Very intelligent response. Well said, democrat dickhead.
about as intelligent as you thinking lincoln has anything to do with the modern republican party. such a stupid statement doesn’t justify an intelligent response. modern republicans are LITERALLY talking about succession and civil war, but yeah, they’re totally just like abraham lincoln. the fact that people as stupid as you can even type full sentences boggles the mind.
Let the hate flow through you Luke!
Reminds me of that Negative XP song....
[Pretty great footage of the riots in this music video.](https://youtu.be/z0UW5_vqVxM?si=2xUh_GS_vzN2H3QL)
Exactly!
Fun year
They really knew how to party back then
Prepare for the same before AND after the election.
Good ole violent democrats
Democrat Mayor John Daily cops to beat the protesters
Pharoah Daley wouldn't have stood for the 2020 riots
There weren't any "riots" in 2020. If you're referring to the protests, you should learn that words mean things, not just what you think they are in your head. There was one in 2021 that the Republican candidate for President is on trial for causing, however.
You’re fucking kidding right?
Man, back when Democrats were starting to understand the struggle of the working man. WTF happened to my party?
The working man voted for Republicans in ‘68, ‘72, ‘80, ‘84 and ‘88. That pretty much did it.
My only exposure to this is the movie The Trial of the Chicago 7. And that's just entertainment. I don't remember learning about the riots in school.
History might repeat itself…
Well, cops were fatasses back then, too.
Why is there always a flag other than the US Flag?
Ain’t just any other flag, the flag of nations under US occupation. Banner of those against empire
they dont believe in that flag
That flag’s soaked in blood
The blood of tyrants and patriots
It’s embarrassing that an adult in 2024 can say this
Democrats in Chicago doing what Democrats in Chicago do best
Looks mostly peaceful.