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

[Theodarzna]

Supporters laud Hillary Clinton’s presumptive nomination as historic, but their view is not in line with the rest of the country.

Only 38 percent of respondents regard her securing the nomination as “a historic moment,” according to a Vox/Morning Consult poll released Tuesday.
Forty-two percent of women find the nomination historic, compared to 33 percent of men. Unsurprisingly, a split emerges by party affiliation. “It might be tempting to think that women are willing to cross party lines on this front, but the poll didn’t bear this out,” Vox writes. Only 19 percent of Republican women regard the nomination as historic, which is slightly less than the 20 percent of Republican men who do.

Hillary is trying to reach out to Republican women, but as Vox says throughout, the view of Hillary and her nomination has more so to do with party than gender.

The poll also reflects a generational divide. Twenty-nine percent of those 18-29 think the nomination is historic. The percentages for those 30-64 are fairly steady, hovering between 34 and 36 percent.

When it comes to those 65 and older, 52 percent find the nomination historic. After the 58 percent of Democratic women who do, older voters are the most likely to view the nomination in this way, along with the 52 percent of Democrats.

These results follow a tense primary between older and younger women. Many young women were not amused by Hillary’s tactics during the primary, including her “Woman Card.” Now that Hillary is the presumptive nominee, conservative and progressive groups alike warn against her nomination.
At best, young voters may be bored or consider the nomination to be the norm. “The notion of the first female major-party presidential nominee is greeted with a collective millennial yawn,” writes Molly Roberts for The Washington Post.

Vox concluded that a Hillary win won’t be because of gender. This is refreshing for those who prefer living in a meritocracy and waiting for a more likable female candidate over bemoaning how many men there are in Congress.

(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.

[zorkuus]

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

Or maybe the tumblr crowd is just a loud minority?

[Xeones]

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".

[Paula Deen]

The term millennial is so vast and overused I want to punch you in the face for using it.

Regardless people my age don't vote. This election will be no different. Go ahead and pull out the polls showing I am wrong but this shit happens literally every election. Young People are super interested in the election but we don't care enough to vote.

[Sandraudiga]

She wouldn't be the first world leader. She isn't even the first women to run for president of the US.

[chrisnumbers]

She's not a woman, she's a politician.

[Underverse]

Millennials don't see it as historic because they, for the most part, already take gender equality of opportunity as a given. And I think there's some truth to that.

[Ayla]

She wouldn't be the first world leader.

Pretty much this. How this is even regarded as historic is mind-boggling, I've seen numerous women jumping for joy on the news just because she's female and that somehow makes it the best thing ever because "women's rights".

[Jacki Treehorn]

A lot more millennials wanted Bernie. That combined with Hilary's establishment ties and her strong unfavorable ratings, it sours this "historic" nomination for many. If it was a candidate more people liked, I think more would be excited.

[derpkitteh]

it should be historic.

but it's not. because the fact that she's a blood thirsty warmonger overshadows the fact that she's a woman.

[Theodarzna]

The term millennial is so vast and overused I want to punch you in the face for using it.

Regardless people my age don't vote. This election will be no different. Go ahead and pull out the polls showing I am wrong but this shit happens literally every election. Young People are super interested in the election but we don't care enough to vote.

I wonder what magic made Obama and the 2008 wave happen then? Ghosts?

[Endus]

She wouldn't be the first national leader of a major power. Plenty of others in the rest of the Developed World.

She wouldn't be the first woman nominated for President in the USA. That's this lady;


What's "historic" is that she's the "first female candidate for President of the United States running for a major party". That's getting a bit silly with qualifications to qualify as "historic".

Now, were she to win, first female President of the USA would qualify as such.

[Paula Deen]

I wonder what magic made Obama and the 2008 wave happen then? Ghosts?

The magical race of people known as the African (Americans.) I could show you statistics that prove that or am I a filthy racist because I bring facts into an argument?

[Fugus]

As Endus said, she isn't the first female candidate so there is nothing historic about that. And even if she makes it to president, I still see nothing more historic about that than if Sanders had won and became the first Jewish president. Which is still nothing historic. Maybe if it was 50 years ago, but not now honestly.

I am more a fan of the policies than the person.I could care less if they are man, woman or whatever the hell Cartman's mom on South Park was nor do I care about what religion they worship so long as they can keep a grip on that shit and not put it before their job (which too many fail to do).

So sorry, the first female sellout president is not something I see as historic. Now if we had a president win against the will of both parties due to popular vote and actually started trying to fix shit, now that would be historic.

[Theodarzna]

The magical race of people known as the African (Americans.) I could show you statistics that prove that or am I a filthy racist because I bring facts into an argument?

They vote reliably democrat all the time, for the youth vote the news tells a very different story.

[Paula Deen]

They vote reliably democrat all the time, for the youth vote the news tells a very different story.

Here is a quote from one of those articles that supposedly tells a different story. "Youth turnout appears to be exceeding 2004 levels"

IE: The numbers are still fucking low. Youth Turnout is always low. Just because a high percentage of them vote one way does not mean they aren't fucking nothing in the long run. The reason I am peeved has nothing to do with this anyway. Its more than Millenial is such a broad term and the most accepted description is anyone born from 1980 to 2000. That is a long fucking time yet people throw the term around like it means young people.

[nonameelf]

It's only historic if she wins. Being a candidate doesn't mean shit. There have been female candidates in the past.

[Stormspark]

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.

[melodramocracy]

Here is a quote from one of those articles that supposedly tells a different story. "Youth turnout appears to be exceeding 2004 levels"

IE: The numbers are still fucking low. Youth Turnout is always low. Just because a high percentage of them vote one way does not mean they aren't fucking nothing in the long run. The reason I am peeved has nothing to do with this anyway. Its more than Millenial is such a broad term and the most accepted description is anyone born from 1980 to 2000. That is a long fucking time yet people throw the term around like it means young people.

That's kind of how generations work.

[Paula Deen]

That's kind of how generations work.

You misunderstand. I am saying these articles and the shit in the OP is using the term Millennial like it means people who are 18 to 25. When it really could mean anyone from the age of 16 to 36. I am not trying to say 36 is not young, but that is double the age of the youngest Millennial. So I would say using the term to describe a generation is just stupid and wrong.