.

Young Democrats: Despite Challenges, Reelecting Obama Remains Priority

Obama can deliver young voters, but future for Democrats is hazy.

CHARLOTTE — Party faithful at this week's Democratic National Convention insist that if there is a dearth of enthusiasm to re-elect President Obama, all will be righted after the President speaks Thursday.

"You might not be able to re-capture what we had in 2008, but we're all still very excited and motivated," said S.C. Rep. Barkari Sellers, 27. "Over the next couple of days you'll see that build up."

Young voters are largely credited with propelling Obama to office in 2008. But there are doubts about whether recent college graduates, who have faced difficult job struggles, will return to the polls this year.

Obama has made high-profile stops at college campuses across the country in the weeks leading up to the convention. An estimated 15 million Americans have reach voting-age since Obama took office, and he's aiming to capture those.

But even some Democrats have doubts. Despite a relatively young 51-year-old president, the party is led by Baby Boomers and holdovers from the Civil Rights movement.

"We've got to do a better job engaging young people," said Fred Swann, 34, of Macon, Ga., who was attending the DNC as a guest this week. "There has been a failure on the local level to engage young people in a meaningful way."

Georgia hasn't elected a Democrat for President since 1996, and South Carolina, where Sellers is regarded as a rising star, hasn't been carried by a Democrat since 1976.

"Our party is one that has to grow," Sellers admits. "When you get old in terms of ideas, you have to reinvent yourself. That's what we are going through right now."

Long-term prospects aside, Democrats at this week's convention say Obama still has what it takes to bring out young voters. They see excitement in Charlotte and back home.

"I know there is a lot of talk out there about the lack of enthusiasm among young people, but I don't know where that's coming from," said Elaine Almquist, 28, of Medford, Mass. "I'm really excited to re-elect our President."

Mitt Romney, despite a sour economy on his side, still doesn't have appeal for young voters, Almquist said.

"Mitt Romney is not even an option," Almquist said. "We're excited to continue … building our economy, investing in the future and making sure that I have a secure future."

reg September 08, 2012 at 01:58 AM
Hmmm....that looks great when you compare annual crime rate in Massachusetts under Romney's term as gov there: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm From Jan 2003 to Jan 2007, all crime in the state overall increased 2.7 percent,and burglary only 0.6 percent, but .... murder rate went up 32.7 percent. According to fartin bob, this means....Republicans do not deliver. Mitt Romney does not deliver.
reg September 08, 2012 at 02:32 AM
uh huh. Of course, metropolitan chicago has a larger population than the whole state of mass.
reg September 08, 2012 at 03:28 AM
oh, and of course it's the fault of the democratic party. Uh huh. lessee......the biggest cause of job drop in the US is layoff of govt employees, including police and firemen. Now, the GOP responsible for the layoff of police and firemen have nothing to do with it. yeah.
reg September 08, 2012 at 03:29 AM
and btw, you *do* know that even if you delete your comments, we still see them in the email notices?
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 03:33 AM
@reg - "I've signed trade agreements that are helping our companies sell more goods to millions of new customers - goods that are stamped with three proud words: Made in America." reg is once again proving that his reading comprehension skills are worth crap! But if that's not enough, here's more from Obama's joint-session address to Congress on jobs: "Now it’s time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama and Colombia and South Korea -– while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/us/politics/09text-obama-jobs-speech.html?pagewanted=all Clearly, those are the FTA's that he was referencing in last night's speech. Once again, Hoffa doesn't expect that you'll admit that you were WRONG, as you've already proven yourself to be of low character and integrity, which kind of explains why you like Obama so much! Cherio!
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 03:37 AM
Funniest part of Obama's speech last night was when he was bragging about working with the GOP to save the taxpayer's the princely sum of $1B. This from the man that promised us that he would half the deficit while saving the economy! "And last summer I worked with Republicans in Congress to cut a billion dollars in spending, because those of us who believe government can be a force for good should work harder than anyone to reform it so that it's leaner and more efficient and more responsive to the American people." In 2011, the federal government was spending $10.460B per day! So that $1B that Obama is bragging about saving us represents about what his administration was spending every 2 hours and 15 minutes. WOW - thanks Obama - What a man! "I'm the President!"
reg September 08, 2012 at 04:22 AM
Metropolitan Chicago, which is where the figures you're pulling out come from, has a population of 9.2 mil
reg September 08, 2012 at 04:30 AM
bwah! *insert hoof in mouth,* hoofer You say "those are the FTA's that he was referencing in last night's speech" ... but did you notice the date on the source you just pulled out of your ear? *2011* Again, he didn't say anything about any FTAs last night, even though you've already claimed *twice* that he did. And before you try one of those "but still..." kind of arguments, you should quit trying to overlook my other entries on this subject. Both K FTA and C FTA were passed by majority GOP congresses and a GOP prez - Obama held them up and made sure that the terms were equal to prevent losing more jobs. Like he said in that same quote you posted here - "Made in America"! now do yourself a favor, head off to the stall and hit the hay, hoofer. You're making a fool of yourself here.
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 04:49 AM
@reg - Are you denying that Obama said this last night, because he did, it's right in the transcript: "I've signed trade agreements that are helping our companies sell more goods to millions of new customers - goods that are stamped with three proud words: Made in America." If he wasn't talking about the Colombian and Korean FTA's, then what trade agreements was he talking about? You're such a jackhole that you can't even admit when you're WRONG!!!
reg September 08, 2012 at 04:56 AM
again, fartin bob, chi-town metro is over 9 mill. I mean, I live in a city of 480K; the entire metro area (which is the factor by which crime reports are calculated) is 1.8 million. and by the way, use a real calculator next time, ok? or ask your teacher how to computer percentiles of differences between two figures, because you're getting that very very wrong. If a number doubles, that's 100%; triples is 200%; almost quadruples, it's almost 300%. ...where are you getting this 375% calculation? Oh, and 2.7 mil is 59% less than 6.6 mil; you're calculating that one backwards. One day, if you improve enough to pass this year, you'll learn that in math class.
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:21 AM
Why, yes! I *am* denying that quote of original reference, which you are now attempting to divert away from, was made last night. Because, as the link address itself says, it *was made a year ago.* So now you’re stuck in another corner you painted yourself into – and now you’re trying to claim that the quote he made yesterday somehow indicates he did something wrong for US trade? That quote verifies he *saved* that agreement from what it was originally intended to be! K-FTA was pushed by Bush, and cleared house and senate in ’06 – GOP dominant throughout. Obama delayed and delayed it with his demands – again came up under GOP dom House; this time, it didn’t get signed until other conditions were met. Free trade or no, SK had other restrictions in its own commerce that affected US trade there, even with no tariffs – purchasing any non-SK made vehicle in SK came with automatic individual audit, for example. Now? NO MORE. And as the president said last night, the only applicability is to US-MADE GOODS. Not anything a US company had made in China. You're a fact-twister - a bad story-teller - and an overpaid troll, hoofer. Head back to the stall!
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:23 AM
again, fartin bob - chicago metro. Disagree? *THEN GET OFF YOUR DUFF AND POST A RELIABLE SOURCE THAT DISPROVES IT.*
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 05:44 AM
@reg - You're an idiot. Hoffa used the jobs speech to show that the reference in last night's speech to "trade agreements" was to the Korean, Panamanian, and Colombian Trade agreements. And you've offered no other trade agreements that Obama signed that he could have been referencing in last night's speech, have you? In fact, you're now denying that Obama even said what he said!!! Honestly - where do you get off? And yet you claim that Hoffa is trying to spin the facts - yeah, I don't think so! You're pretty sick if your partisan bias runs so deep that you'll just ignore and deny the objective factual reality when it doesn't suit your desired outcome. But hey, Hoffa realizes that you can't help it, as that's what unhinged liberals such as yourself do! And if Obama fixed those FTA's to our advantage, as you claim he did, then why did the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Project VoteSmart, CitizensTrade, and other so-called progressive and pro-labor organizations stand so adamantly opposed to Obama signing them? In fact, it would appear that the Teamsters don't believe that the Korean FTA is working very well in our favor: http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2012/06/s-korea-trade-gap-triples-after-job.html And yet you continue to bloviate and perpetuate your Obama can do no wrong spin! You may want to seek some professional mental help before it's too late!
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:53 AM
Here, fartin bob, is count for the Chicago MSA - Total population 9,461,105 100.0 You're apparently new to the census.gov site, and don't know how to use factfinder (which doesn't provide links), so here's another one for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_metropolitan_area This one uses the OMB's MSA parameters, though, and not the Census Bureau's, which is why that link will tell you 9.8 million. (OMB includes counties that include Kenosha and Laporte, which Census doesn't, which is why there's that difference in the total MSA pop counts.)
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:56 AM
oh, sure thing, fartin' bob! Can I use the same cheesy sources you've used, like wiki answers (which you posted on this page) that anyone and their grammaw can provide answers to without any foundation? Yippee!!! (now put down your donuts and read my last comment)
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:58 AM
and please note that on each of your census links, its listed as "Chicago (city)" - and NOT metro/MSA
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 06:17 AM
@reg - First you rip on martin.bob for citing to wikipedia, calling it a "cheesy source," and then you go and cite to it yourself! You apparently have no shame, thus Hoffa feels it appropriate to convey this most appropriate of awards unto you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h0rSTRrQeQ Congratulations - the title serves you well!
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:28 AM
And here you go backpedaling again (right into another corner). You’re twisting the truth yet again. As for the Teamsters (chapters of which I’ve represented, and a new unit at another company I helped form) – the complaint is that it didn’t aid trade deficit. But that’s not what you were first talking about – shoot, here you go again! Changing the direction when you yet again get proven wrong! (On that subject of Teamsters – how dare you fraudulently use that name and picture? Do the editors in your area store that much cheese in their heads that they can’t see the trick you’re trying to play?) And I did not at any point make the “spin” you’re now claiming. But I simply can’t resist to disprove goofy troll entries – which is all you’ve made. You try to misdirect info on my father in law, for pete’s sake, I’ll correct you. And on to the next correction(s) – project Vote Smart is data collection agency that does not offer any conclusions or opinions of any kind. It collects info – it reports info – it does not offer its own opinions on any info, though. If you think the people reading this don’t know that, shame on you!
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:32 AM
How many feet can a hoofer have, and can he fit them all in his mouth at the same time? ...you *do* know the that wikipedia.org and wiki.answers.com are two completely different entities, don't you? Or are you just posting falsehoods hoping that anyone else reading this page is too dumb to know that? (Do you even know what "wiki" means?)
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:34 AM
*then get off your duff and provide the source to your original data pertaining to the homocides in Chicago!* You keep saying their in the city, not the metro .... BUT NOT ONCE HAVE YOU VALIDATED THAT CLAIM. (and I'm really getting tired of the pickup lines you keep sending to me, then deleting so no one else can see them; I've already made it clear that I'm not that kind - and even if I was, you're not my type)
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:41 AM
if you claim your original figures were pertinent only to Chi/city and Chi/metro - then for the last time, fartin bob, *GET OFF YOUR DUFF AND PROVIDE A SOURCE*. And now you're adding even MORE pulling-wax-out-of-your-ears info - what's your source for that metro homicide rate? And are you citing an avg, or number you found elsewhere, and then trying to apply it to Chicago metro? And for the last time - quit sending those pick-up line messages that you later delete from here. You know it gets sent in reply to my email, and you I'll see it,then you try to delete it so no one else can see it. But I've already told you - I am NOT like that; and even if I was, you ain't my type.
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 06:52 AM
@reg - Hoffa stands corrected on his reference to Project VoteSmart. As far as everything else goes though, Hoffa isn't spinning, or painting himself into a corner, or backpedaling, or twisting the truth, or any other colorful metaphors that you wish to use to cover the fact that Hoffa has been proving you wrong or irrelevant at every turn! "And I did not at any point make the “spin” you’re now claiming." How quickly you forgot about your previous comment wherein you stated: " Obama held them up and made sure that the terms were equal to prevent losing more jobs." "...and now you’re trying to claim that the quote he made yesterday somehow indicates he did something wrong for US trade? That quote verifies he *saved* that agreement from what it was originally intended to be!" Well, Obama didn't do a very good job, did he??? Hoffa got you time and again and you just won't admit it because you're not a very honest person - this time Hoffa really is washing his hands of you! But go and pat yourself on the back, convinced of your own 'victory,' because Hoffa knows that's exactly what you will do. Luckily, the record is preserved here for all to see and other readers can independently judge for themselves. My parting remark is that you had better get used to saying "President Romney," as that will be the reality in the fairly near future!
James R Hoffa September 08, 2012 at 07:05 AM
@reg - Where in martin.bob's 12:39 am on Saturday, September 8, 2012 post did he cite to wiki answers exactly? And the reason you discredited wiki answers, because "anyone and their grammaw can provide answers to without any foundation," also applies to wikipedia, as according to their own about page "[a]nyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles...," so Hoffa fails to see how that same standard wouldn't be universally applied, thereby discrediting wikipedia as a credible source. Once again proving your horrible reading comprehension and use of double standards! Burned again by Hoffa, and as usual, you probably won't admit to it, but will instead continue to spin your way into oblivion, like a good little liberal!
reg September 08, 2012 at 07:24 AM
you *do* realize that you just embarrassed yourself again in yet another idiotic interpretation you're applying, don't you? And false reference, even? And on wikipedia.org, you *do* know that those entries/additional info get approved? That there are even gb of discussion and debate on changes to pages before they're approved? (as a contributing wikipedia editor, I know the procedure quite well)
reg September 08, 2012 at 04:30 PM
bobby - you're still not defending your claims. Now, let's be serious on this. You posted info on count numbers, not indices numbers. You're also misquoting your own source (to a source) - your last wikipedia link only displays another link, and which actually posts the rate/100K to be 13.3 - not the 11.3 you posted. Now let's get back to the subject at hand - you claim Obama/Democrats are responsible for a high homicide rate in Chicago (and I won't waste my time explaining to you the difference between homicide and murder, nor the difference between a city and a MSA, nor the difference between a "rate" and a "count"). When I point out that, under Romney's term, the rate in Massachusetts went up over 32.7 percent, instead of replying to that, you just keep trying to peck out your same wounded argument. So, you want to hold Dems responsible for a high rate (that actually has little fluctuation in that entire period). When I use your same method of argument in application to Romney, though, you refuse to respond. You only keep posting your same argument over and over and over. To return this to the original theme I attempted to start (after ignoring the apparent racial inclination of your first) - if you think Dems are responsible for a high rate of this crime, then - using you same premise - isn't Romney responsible for the HUGE elevation in this same type of crime when he was Mass. gov?
reg September 08, 2012 at 05:51 PM
bobby, bobby, bobby - you're at it again. You (eventually, and after multiple requests) presented data, but that data doesn't support your argument - you AGAIN misquote your own last-minute-researched data - and you ignore the question, too. last chance: 1) Boston murder rate is - ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN ATTRIBUTED SOURCE - 13.3, and not the 11.3 you keep pecking in here lately. 2) Massachusetts murder rate DRAMATICALLY INCREASED UNDER ROMNEY AS GOV 3) If you say Democrats are responsible for a high murder rate in Chicago, then - USING YOUR OWN ARGUMENT - Romney was responsible for that dramatic increase in murder while he was governor of that state. Especially since it was a dramatic change from when before he was in that office, and that it dropped off after he left. Again using your same argument, then, "Massachusetts was a failure under the four years of Romney control. The US will be a failure under Romney control."
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:18 PM
terrific - then, under your own calculating methods and basis of argument, MITT ROMNEY DID NOT ACCOMPLISH MUCH OF ANYTHING EXCEPT EXTRACT TAXPAYER MONEY.
reg September 08, 2012 at 06:45 PM
so, it's official, then? You can't respond to the terms of the point you yourself introduced, and must resort to more misdirection? Meaning, then, that everyone now knows 100% that you're wrong? You've done this throughout this tread.
stanley seigler September 09, 2012 at 01:02 AM
with all the distractions, unrelated links, it's difficult to determine what (if any) questions have been asked and if any have been answered...but will use misc question(s) as straight line to provide FYI stuff: 'Why do the Democrats celebrate Bill Clinton, as he's largely responsible for causing our current economic conditions???' to name just a few reasons repeating data (facts) posted to this PATCH thread: 1. 8 yr comparison: debt growth under RR was 189% under clinton 37% 2. then along came W and debt growth was 89% 3. The presidents who averaged the most jobs created per month were Bill Clinton, at 217,000; Jimmy Carter, at 188,000; and Ronald Reagan, at 153,000. That's right. Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan. The only president to preside over a cumulative loss of private-sector jobs was, of course, George W. Bush. adding 4. NAFTA - Permitted the largest wave of off-shoring of industrial jobs in our nation's history... maybe but there is NO substantiating data/facts...OTOH NAFTA has more than tripled trade in less than 20 years...between its members...trade grew from $297 billion in 1993 to $1.6 trillion in 2009...Services, such as banking and health care, quadrupled between 2003 and the 2007 peak...U.S. was a beneficiary of low-cost imports from Canada and Mexico, which increased from $151 billion to a record $568 billion in 2009 http://useconomy.about.com/od/tradepolicy/tp/NAFTA_Facts.htm [to be continued]
stanley seigler September 09, 2012 at 01:04 AM
[contd] 'Why do the Democrats celebrate Bill Clinton, as he's largely responsible for causing our current economic conditions???' 5. [clinton] Signed investment bank deregulation that led to the creation of financial derivatives and CDO's that many attribute to be the root cause of the 2008 financial meltdown. and many disagree...many believe the root cause was WS greed...and GOP free market (friedman/rand) philosophy to which GOPs want to return. 6. was budget surpluses mentioned.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something