this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
541 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4533 users here now

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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Former President Donald Trump is losing older voters to Vice President Kamala Harris, a new poll shows.

A survey released by Emerson College on Thursday revealed that the majority of voters over 70 are supporting Harris, 51 percent, over Trump at 48 percent.

Those results show a major breakthrough for Harris, who has been able to surpass Trump's lead with older voters. Just last month, with President Joe Biden still in the race, 50 percent of voters over 70 supported Trump, while 48 percent of the age group backed Biden.

The over 70 category includes both baby boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964, as well as the silent generation, anyone born between 1925 and 1945.

Don't get complacent! Vote!

(page 2) 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

silent generation. how many of them are left? I think you would have to be over 82 but let me check.....meh. according to wikipedia currently the youngest would be born in 45. I think that has varied and might have been anchored to the even sounding 5 year point. Anyway we are talking octogenarians and older. I mean I know folks are living longer but what percentage of the population is that? ill check....gah can't even find. Lots of how 65+ is growing but that group is mostly boomer who are the largest generation born for the US. Then of those 80+ how many can vote (not have the right to but have the capacity). I guess they did not want to just say boomers and saying boomer at older but 65+ is used a lot maybe they should just use that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Age 79 and up. They make up almost 5% of the US population. Source (Btw, 0.13% of the population is in the generation before the Silent Generation!

However, the 5% goes up to about 6% of the voting population. (Math: Using the source above, we can take out 12.76% for all of Gen Alpha. We can probably drop Gen Z to 15% total under the premise that if the same number of people were born every year, ~70-75% of them would be too young.)

6% still sounds fairly small, but that is over 16 million people.

Yes, there’s physical and mental decline at that point, but most of them still probably have the facilities to vote. Fuck, the current sitting president is in the Silent Generation and yeah, obviously there are questions about his capacity to continue for another 4 years, but he’s definitely capable enough to vote. There’s also mail-in voting that’s heavily used by these demographic groups.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

holy crap, that is much more than I thought and I totally did not even think about you have to minus out everyone under 18 and then if you think voter turnout im thinking 10% might be possible as far as effect. Thanks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

And anyone with a functional brain.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (7 children)

IT 👏 DOESNT 👏 MATTER 👏 HOW 👏 PEOPLE 👏VOTE 👏 IF 👏HIS👏FOLLOWERS👏CHEAT👏 ENOUGH 👏LOCAL👏RESULTS

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›