Summary:

Democrats are becoming increasingly concerned about a possible drop in Black voter turnout for the 2024 presidential election, according to party insiders. The worries arise from a 10% decrease in Black voter turnout in the 2022 midterms compared to 2018, a more substantial decline than any other racial or ethnic group, as per a Washington Post analysis. The decline was particularly significant among younger and male Black voters in crucial states like Georgia, where Democrats aim to mobilize Black voter support for President Biden in 2024.

The Democratic party has acknowledged the need to bolster their outreach efforts to this demographic. W. Mondale Robinson, founder of the Black Male Voter Project, highlighted the need for Democrats to refocus their attention on Black male voters, who have shown lower levels of engagement. In response, Biden’s team has pledged to communicate more effectively about the benefits that the Black community has reaped under Biden’s administration, according to Cedric L. Richmond, a senior advisor at the Democratic National Committee.

However, Black voter advocates have identified deep-seated issues affecting Black voter turnout. Many Black men reportedly feel detached from the political process and uninspired by both parties’ policies. Terrance Woodbury, CEO of HIT Strategies, a polling firm, suggests that the Democratic party’s focus on countering Trump and Republican extremism doesn’t motivate younger Black men as much as arguments focused on policy benefits. Concerns are growing within the party that if they fail to address these issues, disenchanted Black voters might either abstain or, potentially, be swayed by Republican messaging on certain key issues.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
74 points

fuckin find a decent nominee then

permalink
report
reply
27 points

In 2020 there were double digits dems in the primary…

In 2024 we’re expected to believe the only choice is Biden or a Republican.

If you’re pissed “there’s no other nominee” be mad at the party leaders who aren’t allowing a primary. And realize there’s 100s of people qualified to run as a Dem

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Double digit nominees…that all lost to Biden.

We gonna drag them up again? So they can lose again?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

… That’s what a primary is for. So people can, like, actually choose.

There are a LOT of people who don’t want Biden for another four years. There are people who didn’t like him, but have warmed up to him.

Would he win a primary? Yeah, probably, because of incumbent advantage.

But that should be for people to decide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

There were four primaries in 2020 where the contest had candidates other than Biden and Bernie running. Biden lost three of them.

46 primaries had no one under 70 running on either side.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

You mean like one that already beat Trump once?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

Maybe one that isn’t older than average life expectancy already let alone after another term. Just an idea.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

Cool, if that candidate showed up and won the Democratic primary in 2020 I would have voted for them. As things stand I’ll go with the most viable one that’s most likely to defeat fascism. That’s the incumbent, Joe Biden. I don’t care if he’s elderly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

If the DNC didn’t say there would be no primary on day 1 then we might have actually been able to see people step forward. Marianne Williamson is at least running on the issues and is physically capable of having a two hour conversation. Biden… not so much

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Marianne Williamson, the pseudoscience and conspiracy nutter that helped convince a bunch of people with HIV that medicine doesn’t work and praying and willpower would cure them instead?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I don’t know why they’re so content to hitch themselves to terrible candidates. I’ve never in my life voted Republican, and the last time I was excited about a democratic nominee was Obama (RIP young idealistic me). Hillary had more baggage than a travelling circus, and felt a lot like just dead ass casting a vote for Goldman Sachs to run the oval office; Primary Biden made Jeb Bush seem like a live wire, besides not really having much to get excited about on his platform. Bernie was basically the only exciting thing the democrats have had going in soon to be over a decade now. The part has to do better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

They had a lot of what I considered exciting candidates in the primaries; Yang, Sanders, and Warren come to mind. They didn’t win because they weren’t as viable or popular.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Williamson is a nutcase, and Kennedy is a racist anti-vaxxer. How about we get a serious candidate or two?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

As if Biden wasn’t already a serious candidate with a provable winning record.

Biden is clearly the better option and it shows by how much money the Republicans and the far right are dumping into “Democratic candidates” like RFK Jr and Dr. Cornell West. Which is also why the Right wingers and their “Democratic” proxies are the only ones trying to push for a democratic primary that would set a new precedent by primarying an incumbent Democratic President.

The only person this infighting about these unqualified challengers to Biden helps is Trump or whatever MAGA loyalist that replaces him once Trump finally winds up in prison. (Hopefully)

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Capable of a two hour conversation maybe, but a strong candidate? Not even close

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

I think if there was a regular debate schedule it could have gotten interesting. But with the way it is now, you’re absolutely correct

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 469K

    Comments