Well, as I told my kids, once the moocher label is stuck on you, it’s hard to wash out.

We've heard this same song in pretty much every presidential election in the past 50 years.

I don't know why nobody in the scribbling classes seems to credit the notion that The Politically Active Youth might be the kind of people who, when they go to parties, are actively avoided by Most Of The Rest Of The Youth.

Sanders has been winning with young people in every demographic. He has been losing with old people in every demographic. The difference is where that cutoff point is. It is lower for African Americans than it is for White or Latino voters.

Younger voters - 45 and under would need to turn out in 65% to 70% numbers.
Then we're talking real change.

You nailed this one, Charles. Absolutely. An additional point: no way can young activists claim they didn't vote this year because there's no one to vote for, no one to be passionate about, no real difference between the Republicans and Democrats or anyone else, no this, no that, etc. This year's Democratic slate was filled with all kinds of diversity of background and viewpoint. Complacency about democracy, innumerable distractions, fashion-following SJW attitudinizing not bolstered by serious commitment, refusal to do even the least bit of research---these all played a part in the ridiculously low percentage of young people who voted. But this year the excuses won't cut it. Lots of real, serious differences and choices have been out there, and the choice between Sanders and Biden and Warren offers lots of choice still. No excuses not to vote. And I think most of us ARE concerned about low percentages. We want our young to vote. Left, right, or center: vote.

Here is my defense for Warren staying in the race. She helps the progressive cause as long as she is viable (gets over 15%) of the vote in that particular state. She does so because:

1) Not all of her votes will go to Sanders.
2) The best hope for a progressive is a brokered convention.

I realize this is opposite of the situation a week ago. But Biden is clearly the front runner, and may amass a majority of delegates before the convention. If he does, then it is game over.

If he doesn't, then Warren and Sanders supporters (along with all of other delegates) can decide to settle on a progressive that actually has a good chance of winning (such as Julian Castro or Sherrod Brown).

Making matters even more complicated in Washington State, a lot of people have already voted. The worst thing for Sanders is if Warren comes just short of viability (as she did in California). Right now, Biden is sitting at 25% of the vote in California. But he will get more delegates than 25%, since both Warren and Bloomberg got over 10%, but less than 15%. The same is true for Sanders (who is sitting at 33% right now) but again, it isn't about Sanders getting a plurality, or Sanders getting a majority, it is about preventing Biden from getting a majority.

So basically, you want everyone who votes for Warren to switch to Sanders, or you want Warren to be viable (get over 15%). You don't want her in the middle somewhere. The problem is, she is already in the middle somewhere (because of the early voting). Thus it makes sense to give her your support, if your goal is stopping Biden.

Or you know the center is no longer split but the left is...the reason biden is doing better isn’t because he’s connecting more than he was last week, its because all of his challengers from the center have dropped out while the left vote is still split between sanders and watren.

@7 As of today, Biden would still be ahead if all of Warren's delegates were assigned to Sanders. It's not the split progressive vote that's given Joe the lead.

So after the Boomers head off to their final Klan rally in hell, the only people voting will be GenXers, since the Millennials simply refuse to vote in meaningful numbers. And being the most hopelessly fucked generation in the last century doesn’t seem to have moved the needle a millimeter.

It’s not exactly news that Americans are grotesquely stupid, but this really is a new low.

Maybe younger folks don't turn out because they're still figuring shit out.

Maybe voting is a life habit that becomes stronger with repetition, which increases with age.

Maybe political effectiveness is a skill, not an innate gift.

Maybe this skill - like other skills - generally increases with experience, which generally increases with age.

Maybe ten years from now ... and twenty years from now ... and thirty years from now, today's young folks will be more skilled and more confident in exercising the franchise.

The alternative - that young people hatch out having all the answers, and lose them year by year by year - would be quite intriguing if true, BUT as in all things, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

@9 Something tells me the black boomers who carried Biden in the south aren't members of the Klan.

And the young people who didn't turn out, the ones aged 18-29, aren't Millenials. Millenials are heading into their 40s, and their turnout was fine. The "youth vote" that let you down this time are Zoomers, not Millenials.

Kids are flakes.

Charles, when you miss the point, you really miss the point; when you hit the point, you nail it completely. Your analysis here is spot on.

I've never been much of a primary voter as the boring, pragmatic candidate I would have voted for either dropped out by election day OR was polling so low it was a snowball's chance in hell to win. Very easy to forgo a symbolic vote. Would be interested if voter turnout is impacted by the number of candidates.

Young people are clueless and generally suck. Go back to looking at your phone, kid.

I am pretty sure that the assumption that even the majority of Warren's supporters would go to Sanders is...wrong. I am quite certain there are a lot of people like me who wholeheartedly support her because they see that she is/was by far the most competent candidate running for the nomination, not because they think Medicare for All has a prayer in hell of happening. I know quite a few of them. Not that I would vote for Biden in the primary if she dropped out. I suppose there is an argument to be made that a vote for Biden would help prevent the Dems from committing seppuku but I would probably, if I hadn't already voted, find it to be difficult to stomach.

I blame car culture. I don't know the link yet, but I'm sure Charles can find it.

Young voters would vote in larger numbers if they could just swipe right to vote. Otherwise, drive to a polling place and stand in line? Or in Washington, use a snail mailbox?

You are totally right Charles. Politicians since the 1960s (and maybe earlier, but I can only think back that far), have been saying they could win if they could energize the 'youth vote'. MTV started heavily pushing "Rock the Vote" in 1990. It isn't just Bernie. Young people in this country like to yell and protest, but they don'e vote in significant numbers. They haven't for several decades. No politician has managed to nudged that bubble more than a fraction. Bernie does seem to have a very enthusiastic core of support, but the youth vote has nevertheless failed to materialize. Even in California, which he won (probably; the votes are still far from complete), the youth vote was not any better than any other primary, and he won by a much smaller margin than polls predicted. And Bernie campaigned hard in CA, and had a huge ground game. Still no significant youth vote.

And really, he could only win if he could significantly get youth to vote. Young people in general are more excited by the idea of a complete upheaval of the government. Older people in general may want to see change, but less radical change. Old people get used to the way things are, even if things aren't great. They get set in their ways. They are more concerned about radical change, even if that might be better. They are more comfortable with, and less frightened of, incremental change.

@8 ummm i’m not talking about her delegates, I’m talking about total votes on Super Tuesday. If warren would have dropped out before and we assume Sanders picks up her votes it would have been a much tighter race in ok, mn, tx, ma, me. Similar case if center dems waited until after Super Tuesday to drop out.

Regarding younger voters not voting...I'm perplexed, my own daughter doesn't vote and when I ask why not, she says it doesn't matter. The same thing happened in Britain regarding the Brexit.. Canadian elections turnout can often be in the mid 20's to mid 30%. People simply take the right to vote for granted. . Maybe there would be more participation if it was linked to social media/online. Some countries enforce voting??

Maybe it is simply that people get sold on the idea that change is easy. And when change doesn't come as fast or to the degree that was expected, then that leads to disappointment and resignation.

Regarding prrogressive vs establishment.. I'm personally quite tiredof the "artificial polarization".. There is enormous overlap in the goals of the Bernies and the Obama"moderates".. the only difference is what approach will get to the result.
Obama tried crossing the ailsle and got a GOP smackdown. Bernie / AOC supporters want to take a more combative role. Is either approach better or worse... it depend on the situation. Life is not one size fits all. Multiple paths to get to the same goal.

My life expereince has taught me that it generally requires a mutual level of trust and respect, before discenting opinions can reach a compromise. One thing that it seems that Bernie has done by taking such inflexible stances in his political life, that it gives him no wiggle room. It puts him in a position to oversell and underdeliver. To be clear, there is no "establishment" conspiracy against Bernie. They can't control the will of the voters. Biden spent 1/10th of what Bernie did in Super Tuesday and 1/50 of Bloomberg. The voters can't be bought, and simply aren't all buying Bernies sales pitch and the ones who show up at rallies, seem to be unmotivated to show up.

What has to be really grasped outside of the West Coast, is that vast majority of the electorate are middle left or middle right. To get anything done will require compromise. and boring ass pragmatism.

The problems that need to be solved (homelessness, health care, income inequality, climate change) require immediate action, but improvements will be incremental and sometimes frustrating. For example, Medicare for All sounds great, but the whole medicare system needs to be overhauled. Thus there will need to be a transition and "burn-in " phase, before we could responsible get everyone to dump their private insurance.

I think the best approach is to go for low hanging fruit, and build from those successes and learn from the short falls. This will not only see real progress sooner, but will help build cooperation and reduce the current toxic environment.

If anyone can shed light on why 20-30's don't show up to vote, I'd love to know. My daughter doesn't vote. When asked why, she says her vote wont matter anyway. The Brexit happened in large part because 20-30's didn't show up to vote. Not sure if electronic voting would improve the situation?
Maybe a more deeper reason is that many people are sold and conditioned that change will be easy. When it doesn't occur or to a much lesser extent, maybe they become disappointed and disenfranchised.

This is one of the reasons we not so moderate moderates are concerned about the laundry list that Bernie is selling. It isn't that we don't want the same things. In fact there is significant overlap regarding (climate change, income inequality, healthcare, ect..). Its just we all know that change is extremely difficult and takes compromise. A prime example is Medicare for All, sounds good at first blush, but the existing Medicare system needs to be overhauled as it is too costly for existing recipients. There will need to be a time to "reingineer the system", test it before its ready to service the nation.

Obama approach was criticized for trying to reach across the aisle. While he did get a GOP smackdown, what was he realistically supposed to do. The country's electorate is pretty much split 40-40-20.

Bernie , AOC advocate for taking a much more combative approach. Sounds good, but the numbers still aren't there and some are marginally reliable to show up.

There is no conspiracy against Bernie. Voters are voicing their support or opposition at the ballot. I like Bernie, but I'm not so far supporting him because he hasn't articulated anything that I believe can be delivered with the constraints of our electorate or constitution. Bernie hasn't really delivered anything substantial on his vision quest, so one has to ask is it the vision, the approach, or both.

What needs to be earnestly embraced by Bernie and supporters, is that outside of pockets in the West and East Coast and around some college campuses, people are fairly conservative (dems, repubs, independents) and financially risk averse. Most are just beginning to see some daylight from the great Recession and are going to be extremely skeptical of someone peddling lots of social freebies that will be paid by taxing the millionaires and billionaires. History has shown brutally that this isn't a reality.

it will take a whole lot of hard work to reboot or update the system. I believe the best approach is to go after low hanging fruit, build off the wins and learn from the set backs, and continuously and methodically improve. In engineering it is referred to as Kaizen. In simpler terms, we need to do lots of baby steps, really fast.

apologize for two post.. operator error.

I'm with @21, I could not wait to vote and I voted for President Clinton the first time I voted and I have voted every since in every election in which I was eligible to vote. I can't comprehend not wanting to vote. If voting and civil service were mandatory this country would be better (in that it might be closer to an actual democracy --- a government for the people, by the people, of the people).

Good Morning Charles,
While I largely agree with the contents of your post, I disagree with this:

"He is a white man who stuck with his black boss for eight years. There was no turbulence during this entire time. Biden appeared to do his job in exactly the same way he would for a white president. This fact means a lot to older black American voters. Sanders might have a better social program than the present frontrunner, but he has not been tested like Biden. He has never worked under a black man. If you cannot understand why this is of great importance to many black Americans, then you simply don't understand black history, which is also the history of black disappointment."

It's not because Obama was black man and Biden a white one. It was because one was the President and the other a VP. It's virtually impossible for a VP & POTUS to have friction or turbulence between them. If there was, it would jeopardize the Party's next election chances.

And no, Black history is not a history of Black disappointment. It is categorically a history of African-American success as well. African-Americans have been elected mayors, members of Congress, US Senators, Governors among other offices in the USA. Barack Obama is the pinnacle of that success. He was elected 2X POTUS.

Poly sci 101. Never ever rely on youth and habitual non-voters. They tell the pollsters one thing and in the end never show up. I've heard so many lame excuses like "well my generation has to work and go to school so we are disenfranchised because I don't have time to vote." Total BS...Everybody is busy little twerp. You are not special.

The reason "older" African Americans voted for Biden is OBVIOUS -- he's promising to return our Federal Government to previous levels of decency and basic operation. He's electable, and maybe the most experienced candidate in recent times. (Yes, more than The Hillary.)
Bernie is a left-wing firebrand who has numerous videos on YouTube extolling the joys of socialism. He will get absolutely shredded in the general election and every down ballot Democrat will have to spend significant time and money explaining why they aren't communists too. An idealistic vote, yet Pyrrhic.

"But why Biden? Why not vote for Sanders, whose program would, if realized, would make life better for black Americans? The answer is, of course, Obama. "

The key is your own phrase, "if realized." Bernie's platform only gets realized if 1) he gets elected and 2) he can convince what would at best be a narrow Dem majority in Congress to "realize" it.

On the first point, many voters, black, white, or whatever, seem to feel that Biden has a much better chance of being elected.

Second, getting any of his major proposals through Congress is a near-impossibility. Dems from halfway conservative states would choke on the tax increases required to, for example, make college free. Not to mention that reforming health care by euthanizing the entire insurance industry, whipping up huge opposition, and putting millions of people out of work would be a very heavy lift, to put it mildly.

20, Sir Toby, I agree completely. I'd prefer Warren but this country won't elect a woman (and she has already dropped out) so I will vote for Biden. If he doesn't become the candidate I will hold my nose and vote for whoever it is, rather than see the WH continue to be infested by orange slime. That orange gasbag is a parody of an actual decent human.