Home | About | Donate

Millennials’ Non-Voting Habits, Explained


Millennials’ Non-Voting Habits, Explained

Kate Aronoff

What’s the matter with millennials? The latest person to ask and answer this question is Vox’s David Roberts. Listing out a series of polls explaining how supportive 18-29-year-olds are of climate action and clean energy, Roberts reaches a crossroads: If millennials care so much about global warming, then why aren’t they doing anything about it?

“The problem is, too few of them vote,” he says, pointing to low voter turn-outs in the last few elections.


Just be careful of those candidates Steyer says are climate friendly.


Kudos to Kate Aronoff for laying out the most compelling sketch to have emerged as yet in this campaign season for why the Wall Street D Party is still right where it was electorally in 2014: dead on arrival in the electoral waters of US politics! The bottom line is far from one line. Bottom line is more than one line. Among these bottom lines are these few, and several others, quite a few others. If the D Party wants to win over Trump this fall, it has to pull it's stupid talking heads out of Wall Street's greedy arses. If the D Party wants to win over Trump this fall, it has to find far more electable candidates than any it has come up with to date in this election season - excepting only the few who the D Party puppets have already rejected. If the D Party wants to win over Trump this fall, it needs adult supervision, and now! To suppose Trump will be worse than Clinton in the White House is the height of extremely ill-informed self-delusion.

Kudos to Kate Aronoff! Many kudos, indeed! Viva' la revolution! So what if the Donald also buries the Wall Street Ds? What better or greater gift could we ask for from the dead-in-the-electoral-waters GOP Puppets and the dead-in-the-electoral-waters-D Puppets?!


I learned it at the University in the '70s & wonder why you didn't. Except I realized then that most were not even interested in learning that history or its political/economic lessons.


The story that FDR's New Deal shook out of lots of Murkins protesting is 10% of what actually drove the New Deal and what the 1% want us to believe.

During the first half of the 20th century 10% of Murkins who voted supported socialist or communist candidates who were ON THE BALLOT, giving Dems and GOP congresscritters cover to support the New Deal to keep the US from going commie. Huey Long and a few other leftists also played a role.

With 98% of Murkins who voted in 2012 supporting the corporate Dem or GOP candidate and only 1% supporting the two socialist candidates and 1% supporting the other 4 progressive candidates, the Democrats have zero incentive to toss any crumbs to the 99% and every incentive to withdraw the few New Deal crumbs they have not already withdrawn.

Until more of the 99% understand this actual history we will continue to be subject to chosing between getting our left leg cut off (Clinton) or our right leg cut off (Trump).


When I read this on Friday, I couldn't help but think (esp. when reading that protesters 'place faith in protests than in politicians'):

"Give the millenials someone worth voting for and they'll go out and vote in droves! What a novel bloody concept!"

Then I realize, well, we are in a duopoly. I'd have a better chance winning the Illinois Lottery.