and once Obama is no longer in any national election, will the young voters just go back to doing whatever they were doing before Obamamania?

There's maybe a hair of difference between Clinton on Obama on policy.  I think that my generation is a more liberal generation, and I'd like to think that our involvement extends beyond simply Senator Obama fandom.

I think you're pretty likely to see Barack Obama's young supporters turn out for HRC on election day if that is the case.

if you want to have a analytical logical open minded discussion free of all the REV WRIGHTS and BOSNIA  distractions.....you came to the wrong site my friend. but I will add this if the democratic party is anything like this site we are in a downward spiral

Scenario 1 - Obama wins the nomination.

See McGovern, George.  Young people are notoriously unreliable, even though in every election cycle they are supposedly energized and ready to turn up in droves.  Somehow the fire of the primary season goes out by November.

Scenario 2 - Clinton wins the nomination.

Who knows?  Young people are mesmerized by Obama, not the Democratic Party.  I predict marbles will be taken and gone home with quicker than you will believe if the correct candidate is not chosen (the "my guy or nobody" attitude).  

He brings people into the process.  Especially young people.  I have a working theory (which I probably picked up from NPR or something) that people make up their minds about political parties at a relatively young age for fairly subjective reasons and then either stick with the party or only switch if there is a political earthquake of some kind.

Obama reaches young voters who will probably end up voting as Democrats for a long time unless the party fails them utterly.

It may be that people are excited enough about the election this year that it doesn't matter whether Clinton or Obama are the nominee.  But a lot of these people got interested because of Obama.

One last point - This is the fundamental progressivism of Obama's campaign.  Get people involved and interested in politics.  A population which is disengaged from politics is a conservative population.  Disengagement from politics means that the population doesn't believe in the power of the government to do good things.  If people have that general attitude, they won't really care when someone is appointed to run an agency they're not qualified to run or have actively worked to undermine in the past.

Eh, Clinton gets about 40% of those under 29 and they are a smaller portion of the Democratic electorate than African Americans. Obama and Clinton split those up to 44, and she wins voters 45 and up.

Either candidates will have to work to unify the party, African Americans will be the big block for Clinton to work on.

I am a young voter. Only 24. Al Gore "losing" was my FIRST foray into politics and I am still around. Kids are resilliant. And WE CARE ABOUT OUT WORLD. If Obama isn't the nominee, the kids will still be democrats and they will still grow up to be democrats.

This "young voter" is sticking with the Democratic party regardless.  I can't see myself anywhere else.

With that said, however, I'm getting tired of the insinuations that, as an Obama supporter, I somehow took at him as the Messiah or I'm too young to understand true hardship, or if I would just analyze the candidates more I would see the light and support Clinton--from other Democrats.

I grew up in a pretty crappy home.  I was raised to believe that everything was the end of the world--literally.  In my house, Bush Sr. was the anti-christ for attacking Iraq and Desert Storm was the beginning of Armegeddon.  Then Bill Clinton came to save the day.  I was 12 when he was elected, and that man was a God to me.

You can thank my abusive, mentally ill mother for bringing me to the Democratic party, but please (for the people who do it) stop insinuating that I, as an Obama supporter, don't take every opportunity to think freely now that I am able to.

:)

Yes, the youth vote is important, but I think it's overrated in terms of the future of our party. Today's campus activist is often tomorrows insurance salesman with a family a house in the suburbs and a host of problems he didnt' have as an 18 year old freshman.

several polls have shown.

Yes, the youth vote is important, but I think it's overrated in terms of the future of our party.

?

Obama isn't running as a Democrat

He is running as Barrack Obama Super star.

I worry more about losing the middle aged over bias toward the young because that is who will keep your party in money and votes for the next 10 years.

The young won't become conservatives overnight.

The base will leave the party overnight if the trend away from democracy continues.

I think you can thank Rush Limbaugh and Jerry Falwell for this generation of liberals. All the Lewinsky bullshit, too. I'm 26 (just BARELY generation Y), and that's certainly the case with me. I disliked Republicans long before it was cool, and so did most people my age.

See, there is a change in the wind where "the kids" are voting for people over party.

That is why a lot of "Paultards" are now for "Obama Super Star".

The older generation is still stuck in a weird Partisan limbo which is a cultural artifact from the 60s.

We have grown up in a world with instant global information and no longer see the world is distinct black and white, good and evil, and right vs left.

We see the spectrum, and vote for the person closest to our part of the spectrum.

I ran multiple caucuses here.  We have several student-only precincts, whose votes totalled 223-3 Obama to Clinton.  Yes, those are the real numbers.

They're not going to get out of bed for Hillary Clinton.  Sorry.  It will be a huge loss for us all if she is the nominee, and it will hurt organizing for years.

Your conception of the situation, no doubt due in part to the narrative created by the media for thei favored candidate, is completely off base. The super delegates will be neither giving anything to anyone, nor taking anything away from anyone. Obama supporters need to realize that the super delegates will vote (or certainly should vote) for the candidate they feel would be the best president. This is how the system works in the Democratic Party. It doesn't matter if you like it or don't like it, that's how it works.

Some Obama supporters have got to cure themselves of the delusion that Obama is entitled to the nomination because he is ahead at this point. Neither candidate is entitled to jack squat until he or she reaches the magic number at the convention in Denver. The fact that some Obama supporters see the race in these terms demonstrates both their arrogance and their naivetee. Meanwhile, Hillary just keeps plodding along in this classic Tortoise vs. Hare confrontation.

   a lot of young angry voters voted for Ralph Nader..and look what happened.

  Arguably, a very stupid move on their part, but history is history.

  Fast forward to 2008, they are already young. And if the nomination is stolen from Obama, they'll be angry.

  what do you think might happen?

Hope young people like wearing camo fatigues and crawling on their bellies through the deserts of Iraq/Iran/God Knows Where Next

Hillary would be much better than McCain.  Just because we aren't utilizing the draft at the moment, doesn't mean it can't be brought back again.

A Hillary Supreme Court would be much better than a McCain Supreme Court. Taking a woman's right to choice for granted? I would not.  Taking a "right to privacy" for granted? I would not.

This is the only election I can remember where young people are being marginalized. One doesn't need to have lived for half a century to enjoy being involved in the political process. At 27, my generation is concerned with issues that may not be as important to older Americans but to dismiss the youth as being along for some kind of an Obama 'magic carpet ride' is extremely foolish.  

Glad to heat that you will support Hillary "no matter how she wins". That's very gracious of you, but you can relax, because she will be the nominee if she gets the required number of delegates, just like Obama. If young people don't vote or vote for McCain or Ralph Nadir, then they will be complicit in McCain winning the White House and will have more than lost the ability to criticize anything he does as president.

The Democratic Party is not going to hand the nomination to Obama just because some young people (who have a very shaky record on voting in any case)  are threatening to hold their breath until they turn blue. If they won't support the nominee of their party (especially when he may well be the VP nominee), then they weren't real Democrats anyway.

I think younger voters are being "marginalized" because of disappointment with 2000 and 2004, the same reason Nader voters are now marginalized.

Just a few more votes....dammit....in Florida...dammit

So close and yet so far.

Followed by percent turnout by age...the younger voters didn't vote in the same percentages as older voters.  (Probably younger people have more exciting things to do)

The Nader voters didn't MEAN to give us G. Dubya.  But they did.  If young voters had KNOWN how bad G. Dubya would be, they would have gone to vote in greater numbers.

This time, hopefully we KNOW how important every vote is.  G. Dubya became President based on 500 votes in Florida. He never should have been President. Never should have happened in the first place. So I think it is just frustration.

just like independents, Clinton is beginning to hold her own among younger voter.

In California with a large Hispanic population, she tied with Obama according to the exit polling among all voters under 30. In Ohio and PA, she tied among white voters under 30. As she makes more effort to attract younger voters, she is doing better.

how do we know that young women won't come out to vote for a woman? Why does no one ever factor that into this?