Poll: 70% of millennials don’t believe Hillary’s nomination is “historic”

[IIamaKing]

Is the "Woman Card," working? Odd for the generation that seems to gravitate towards Identity Issues, but yet here, completely lacking in enthusiasm.

Giving to much weight to a handful of internet loud mouths.

[Very Tired]

It would sure be one for the history books if the first women nominee ever was beaten by the worst male presidential nominee of all time. Women wouldn't live that one down anytime soon.

[Gephyrophobia]

It's not historic, corrupt pieces of shit get the nomination every election. What's new here?

[Mad_Murdock]

I still think it's get a whooptie doo, because it doesn't feel all that earth shattering anymore. The kids below 30 are far more use to it then the old people over 60. Or maybe it's not such a big deal because after having our first black president nothing really changed. The world didn't end and we didn't hit utopia either. So if Hillary wins we get to add another notch of "Hey we just elected a X to the highest office" and just like Race, the gender problems that may or may not be there, will still be there 8 years later.

[Deleted]

Is the "Woman Card," working? Odd for the generation that seems to gravitate towards Identity Issues, but yet here, completely lacking in enthusiasm.

Contrary to what publicists and journalists seem to believe, young people aren't complete gullible morons. They have their own things to care about: their fucking student loans, shitty career perspectives, growing inequalities, crumbling trust in public institutions of any kind (rightfully so, since they were pretty much gradually abandoned in the interest of all the lobbyists and special interest groups). They know they have shit for agency and are aware that politics are just a theater, not much different from TV commercial housewives gushing about how super awesome the newest laundry detergent is. They ofc don't usually articulate it that way... but that's what it boils down two. Having grown up in the world of constant marketing overload and propaganda, they are completely disillusioned by it. Why would they believe candidate X is such a big deal moreso than they'd believe laundry detergent Y is better than laundry detergent Z? Because they were told that in a commercial?

Yawn indeed.

[BuckSparkles]

I couldn't give 2 shits if it is historic or not.

We need to elect people on policy, not simply to make "history."

Progressives might be obsessed with "historic" moments, but I am not.

[klogaroth]

Contrary to what publicists and journalists seem to believe, young people aren't complete gullible morons. They have their own things to care about: their fucking student loans, shitty career perspectives, growing inequalities, crumbling trust in public institutions of any kind (rightfully so, since they were pretty much gradually abandoned in the interest of all the lobbyists and special interest groups). They know they have shit for agency and are aware that politics are just a theater, not much different from TV commercial housewives gushing about how super awesome the newest laundry detergent is. They ofc don't usually articuate it that way... but that's what it boils down two. Having grown up in the world of constant marketing overload and propaganda, they are completely disillusioned by it. Why would they believe candidate X is such a big deal moreso than they'd believe laundry detergent Y is better than laundry detergent Z? Because they were told that in a commercial?

Yawn indeed.

Can you summarise this post in three emojis or less please.

[Sunseeker]

Reasons why there's nothing historic about Hillary:

1: She's not the first female leader of the western world. England, Germany and fuck, the Philippines beat us to that.
2: She's an older, wealthy white female politician who is a member of a wealthy, politically-entrenched family who has already been in the White House.

Her not securing the nomination would have been historic. Because history tells us that wealthy white people who are politically connected tend to get elected, the wealthier and more connected you are, the better your chances. So, "the same thing that has happened throughout history" isn't exactly historic. I'm not saying a Bernie nomination would have been historic as he would fall into this as well, just at a lower level.

[hydrium]

Her indictment will be historic.

ftfy.......

[Independent voter]

I get the sense most of the women in my life will be voting with their vages. Eww.

[Deleted]

I get the sense most of the women in my life will be voting with their vages. Eww.

TBH in a Trump v Clinton election you might as well let your genitals decide. Or your dog, or w/e.

[klogaroth]

Liking something doesn't make it historic.

Sorry, but the US is just well behind the curve when it comes to female leaders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._of_government

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_and_appointed_female_heads_of_state

Between all of the female presidents and prime ministers the world has seen Hillary is well down the list.

She's not even top 150.

Being outside the top 150 of something doesn't really count as historic.

More populated nations have seen female leaders.
Other highly developed nations have seen female leaders.

It's just an about time thing, not a historic event.

US first of something the rest of the world did ages ago - the rest of the world doesn't give a damn.
This is faction first boss kill on a low pop server level of historic.

She's also, much as it pains me to say it, not even won the presidential race yet.

[TheTaurenOrc]

When will the Hillary camp learn that having Katy Perry sing before a rally doesn't automatically win the 'youth' vote. And that Bernie wasn't so popular because old, white, Jewish men became cool overnight.

[Deleted]

i dont think its important to note the gender/race of a president, its more about their policies than the colour of their skin or their genitals. i doubt anyone (many at all?) voted for obama because of his skin colour or hillary because shes a woman, if they do, thats pretty dumb reasoning for picking a candidate

- - - Updated - - -

TBH in a Trump v Clinton election you might as well let your genitals decide. Or your dog, or w/e.

i'd just flip a coin, tails vote Hillary, heads vote trump. easy!

[Bigbazz]

Well it's historic in that she could be the first female US president, but meh Thatcher was Prime Minister before I was even born so it's not like the concept of a female world leader is a new thing.

[Kithelle]

The issue is she is so firmly establishment and corrupt that her being a woman doesn't matter to many people, except apparently people who were alive at a time when womens rights weren't quite up to the standards they now are.

When many people look at her as a candidate they see someone who takes bribes from the elite, not "The first woman president omg".

QFT

I wouldn't care if she was our first Latino, Female, and Homosexual president all in one, for example. She is corrupt as fuck...and I hope we don't end up with her for four years.

[Boreaz]

Don't care. She's corrupt and a liar, and would gladly sell us to the highest bidder if it benefits her wallet to do so.

Basically, this.
Any kind of enthusiasm I personally might have had towards having seen the first woman to become president during my life time, is immediately soured by it being Hillary.

[flyspyro]

(Source)

So, the Youth are not exactly jazzed about Hillary, indeed the country in general doesn't seem to be popping off for her or at all that interested in a somewhat historic event.

Is the "Woman Card," working? Odd for the generation that seems to gravitate towards Identity Issues, but yet here, completely lacking in enthusiasm.

Honestly, as a female and a millennial, It's not about the womens card. Sure being a women is a nice change we do need a new prospective.. i'm tried of the boys club crap in the USA... BUT Bernie's policies are more appealing.

[Florena]

It is historic, no question about it. The question is whether it's a good thing that SHE is the first woman in this position. Which is a debate I don't care to get into right now.

[Misdreavus]

It's historic because she's the first woman party nominee. This has nothing to do with people's opinions about her whether they agree with her views, past, or whatever. The fact that she IS a woman and she IS the presumptive nominee, makes it historic. People can hate her all they want, they can judge her and her past decisions all they want, but at the end of the day, she achieved something that no other woman has before and she has millions and millions of supporters. Even if she is a corrupted as the conspiracy theorists say she is, that is irrelevant because she has convinced so many people to support her. That in itself is admirable of anyone in general. For better or worse.