Just warming up

This seems to be a core constituency that generally reflects reality.

First there are demographics. DU trends much, much older and much whiter than the party as a whole.

Second, places like DU are going to be much more loyal and less critical of the party. You're going to see the most devoted of the devoted.

It's not a reflection of the world. All you'll get is a reflection of this particular space.

I knew it was high from previous polls/discussions over the years, but I guess I didn't think it was that high.

But then, a lot of us have been here forever and were 20+ years younger when we arrived. We've aged along with DU.

Makes me think that we're not gaining very many newer, younger members and maybe haven't for a long time. Hmm.

Like I enjoy hanging out here because it makes me feel like a young person. And I'm in my 40s. But when I have to go in on, "Why you don't understand Millennials . . ." I feel like I'm still having the same conversation I was having in my 20s.

All the impetuousness of my 20s with just a smidge of eye-rolling at the youngins. It's the perfect mixture of incredulous and amused that suits my ego well.

I suspect there's a lot of that going around. Sometimes, the opposite is true. I'll be having a conversation with someone on DU that seems like a peer (mid 50's, in my case) and find out they're 85. A lot of things are universal, and it's often a really interesting dynamic. Or maybe I'm just an old soul.

We sometimes do fall a bit too easily into stereotypes and a bit of binary thinking, and I sometimes wonder if the somewhat limited demographics are a factor. It's human nature, of course, but we seem particularly susceptible here. Or maybe it's just that some are particularly vocal about it.

You can test this for yourself by logging out. It's not a great user experience. Hard to get through even one thread.

Why would visitors want to join? They would have to be especially motivated. Having means to pay for a star membership helps; it's like night and day. But I think the initial impression of this site today is not what it was when we joined. It seemed easier to participate for a while as a nonmember back then, and then you fall in love with the place and want to support it.

I don't have an answer for this. I know this site needs ad revenue, which has dropped.

OR the party's rule of law norms, or social policies held by all the categories?

In reality, with such a diverse party as the Democrats, how could there ever be any demographic group that's the most representative of the party? Seriously.

DU is older, whiter, and a bit more conservative resulting from that. Ever watch a conversation about student loans?

And I said cross-section. Does DU's demographics reflect an accurate representation of the party as a whole? It does not. This isn't seriously in dispute.

C'mon now.

A representative sample would have a proportional age spread at the very least. The very least. And when 25% of your party is under 29 years old, and we have *checks* one person here who is, what is the objection here?

DU is representative of the national party. Age matters not.

DU'ers know that this site doesn't expect to set itself or its participants apart from this party.
It's all there in the DU rules.

We've quibbled about details and tactics, but overall, support whatever our MUCH better informed presidents do.
We only divide when some on DU believe corporate hype-by-design. We are diverse, very different, and because we're a reflective, self-correcting party that's committed to rule of law, we are still a unified party.
Age matters not.

No, it simply isn't. Many members of DU are not Democrats. They are independents and others on the left who do not identify as Democrats but share some (but not always all) common goals.

As for the demographics, they are night and day. It's not just age. Look at polls in the archives and you'll find that we vary drastically from the party as a whole and always have.

Why you're insisting that a massive difference in demographics means nothing is a bit perplexing. It's a ridiculous assertion.

There have been numerous polls over the years on DU about various demographics. They have consistently shown that we're a niche and not representative of anything beyond DU.

I meant to go back and check the poll results, but I forgot. I can't say I'm surprised, though many of us were much younger when we first came to DU.

We came when BushCheney were installed. We were in robust active middle age then…

…and many of us had real life experience in political activism from our youth, which we used to oppose BushCheney..

We stayed. We made friends. Many subgroups formed.

It’s amazing what a quarter century will do to one’s age and energy. I thought everybody else stayed the same age — it was kind of a shock to realize everybody else aged too.

* Each only reflects DU, and a snapshot at that
* Online polls are not worth the paper they are printed on

Agree. Snapshots only, and worthless online polls.

Here we were discussing representativeness -- one self selected sample from DU; and one random sample of US adults -- neither of which scale for the Democratic Party, nor out of a population that's impossible to representatively sample to begin with.
An old rule of population statistics (at first tried by Gallop in the late 30's) used to be that 10% of a population could produce a representative random sampling; now statisticians have 'evolved' to say that 1% of a population produces representative random sampling. No poll has ever counted 1% of over 200 million eligible voters, which is why margin of error (seriously? ) has been prevalent for decades.

Will tell you nothing about how Democrats in the real world feel about this issue.

So what many of those who post here think will influence the rank and file down the line. If politically engaged Democratic activists think Biden is not too old, something I wholeheartedly agree with, then that will filter down and affect opinion in the party.

DU is representative of DU, and little more. A niche group, which is what we are, is not going to "filter down" and significantly impact a vastly larger group. Most voters likely have no clue we even exist.

"Democratic activists" isn't really accurate, either. Many on DU aren't Democrats, though we usually share common goals.

https://democraticunderground.com/100218739374#post19

There are a lot of liberals and progressives on the site that don't ID as Democrats, for various reasons. "Activists" might also be a stretch as a global descriptor, though that's another topic. Most still essentially "caucus" with Democrats, of course, to use a congressional reference.

Your point about DU being politically-engaged is accurate, of course. We often mistake DU as being representative of some larger group, but it really isn't. Most people in the real world aren't anywhere near as politically aware, and many don't pay attention to day-to-day political maneuverings at all.

Why risk it?

Be like a poster pinata.

The question is an invitation to be critical of the President or the party on a sensitive issue.

And, well, you take your chances.

Pass on this bit of flypaper.

So we have to work with what we have. The handwringing isn't productive.

Doesn't matter what anyone thinks. We're in the situation we're in, and the only path forward is to be as productive as possible with where we're at.

We'll never convert the mindless bigots. So let's concentrate on showcasing Biden's record of what he has accomplished. Let us trumpet the great work our VP is doing every day. This is where our energy and money should go.

Biden is a better president than anyone in the party half his age, and we know it.

If you disagree, name one Democrat who'd make a better president than Joe Biden. That's the sensitive issue not being addressed here.

Context matters, and in this case especially, it matters a LOT.

Old is a fact.

Too old is an opinion. It also implies that Biden isn't up to the task.

There's no bashing, just someone's honest opinion. If someone thinks he's too old, then they don't have to bash him to say why. I know a few people who think he's too old, but has an outstanding VP behind him and of course, the alternative is a ridiculous consideration. It keeps coming up and since the last thing in the world we need is another Trump presidency, it's worth asking.

The question should be "can he do the job?" Not is he "too old"

Do you have any understanding of statistics and the normal curve? There are always plenty who fall into the extremes of "average" whether it is age performance or most any other issue like digestion times, drug absorption, etc... If you don't understand, maybe read a bit about it. Or ask someone (possibly older) and/or more experienced on these matters. Really.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution

That's the clear implication -- he's too old for the job.

He's clearly not too old for the job now, since he's obviously doing it and doing it well. Will another four years matter? There's no point in fretting about it, because another Biden term is the only realistic, acceptable outcome.

As an aside, I can't remember anyone (perhaps outside of DU) ever saying that it's OK that Biden is too old because Kamala Harris is his VP. That just doesn't happen in the real world.

There is no real discussion possible on DU on this issue. However, given the "yes", and "chose not to vote" groups in this rarefied DU subset of Democrats in general, the conclusion is obvious that age is a damper on voter motivation.

As a longstanding DUer (since 2002) I will gladly and wholeheartedly support Biden as our nominee. But I won't shut up about him not being our best choice nor about his age and apparent age-impaired vitality being a cause for concern.

No, he isn't too old. He's the best we got.

What part of that can the most ageist among us not understand? Age is a chronological number. Some live long and apply their amazing experience to remarkable good. If we LET them.

At this point in his life Jimmy Carter would be a better president than Donald Trump.

I am truly tired of the SHIT
GIVE IT A REST ALREADY!

And I’d prefer a candidate who is closer to President Obama’s age when he was elected. But Biden is hardly any older than Trump, and a much, much, much better candidate and person so his age should be irrelevant in this matchup.

and all my dem friends. Would prefer younger candidate but definitely will vote for Joe!

I don't expect to see this BULLSHIT on DU.

Case in point: In November 2023, voters in Texas had 14 constitutional amendments to vote on. They are almost always slam dunks to be approved. Thirteen of the fourteen passed. The one that didn't pass was the proposition raising the mandatory retirement age for state judges from 75 to 79. Extrapolation of that nationwide may or may not be valid, but it certainly gives a sense of how voters see the issue of advanced age.

You can think he's too old, but still plan to vote for him because the alternative is fascist dictatorship. Or, because he has a savvy, reliable VP who will step in and provide outstanding leadership.

Who better to neutralize this criticism than Democratic party activists who are engaged at all levels of party activity?

And a poll is always a matter of who gets asked.

in the case something bad happens.

Because "enough of this bullshit" wasn't an option.

I'm not saying there aren't valid concerns, but Joe is going to be the nominee. Joe has done an amazing job these past few years and will continue to do amazing things as President. That's not going to change in this election and doing polls like this won't serve much. I get the curiosity, but I believe there are many here reading this who can view such discussions as demoralizing. We don't need to feed any more energy into the MSM bad faith questions/stories about Biden being too old.

Also, this question is discussed ad nauseum on DU. You don't have to look far to find opinions on the subject. Just because it hasn't been presented in poll format doesn't mean the subject is not discussed.

How is his job performance? Now that's a relevant question that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with age. I've known people way younger than me who could barely string together two coherent thoughts. I've known people way older than me who were sharper than I've ever been.

They should ask if Trump is too unstable

So those willing to participate in the poll or give responses will be very unscientific at best.

But age doesn’t necessarily associate to mental acuity. They are lots of non thinking young folks.

The evidence is pretty clear he can. Trumpty Dumpty was totally incompetent the first time around. I don't see that changing despite the fact he had four years to learn.

…

Look at the person, not the age.

He's capable, healthy, and well qualified.

Better questions would be:

1) Is he healthy enough to withstand the physical and mental requirements for the position of POTUS?

Yes.

2) Does he have the knowledge, skills and temperament required to be POTUS?

Yes.

We're not electing an individual who claims "I alone can fix it," we're electing the titular head of a national party with a defined governing agenda. As long as Biden appoints good people to important posts and consistently supports Democratic party principles, which I believe he has done quite well, I honestly don't care if he forgets stuff or mispeaks on occasion.

IMO:
Joe wins every time.
Most people griping about his age couldn't pass a citizenship test.

For these reasons, Joe's the guy.
Wisdom is in short supply.
Compassion is rare
like steak tartare
Joe's the one
who gets things done

While folks despair
about gray hair.

REMINDER:

Unlike other societies, from which many of us descended, American "culture" mocks age and wisdom in favor of dazzle, clownishness, dick waving and "do as I say and not as I do" false morality.

A wise man once said "An asshole only sees where you've been, not where you're going"

...for many of the reasons listed in the replies above, this poll is an excellent example of why we should not take polls so seriously and indeed, why we should not even amplify polls that may very well be created to leave a specific implication with the reader of the poll.

(Disclaimer: I did not participate in the OP poll.)

Will Biden's age matter at all when the issue is a fascist takeover of the country and the end of the Constitution as we know it?

That's the focus. And I hope that there are enough Americans with the intellect and reason to see what is happening and cast their ballot accordingly, because we will not be getting any help from anywhere else. And I hope, if leadership at the DNC reads some of what gets posted here, this will motivate them to unify this party, get past the propaganda and elect Biden to a second term with a Democratic dominated Congress, not just a slim majority. We want things done for the good of the country and the preservation of its democratic government.

so slowly, some of that is because of his stutter so not a big deal. But he has done GREAT things for all of us and for that he deserves to win and the alternative is unimaginable.

Having a rehash of 2020 is excruciating and I blame the press for this.

In a better match up it would be someone like Gavin Newsom, Kalama Harris or Pete B all of whom would be out campaigning with powerful energetic inspiring in your face truth telling speeches for all to hear and understand.
Flame away

Nobody here is going to vote for Trump or sit out the election because of Biden s age

don't ask is Harrison Ford too old to act or is Mick Jagger too old to sing. I have a friend who is 89 and has just completed a textbook for physics professors to use on advanced physics.

with the COVID-19 vaccine are approaching their 70s. Too old some say? Many on this board would not be alive today without the results of their work. And they are still at it because that technology stands ready to address many other infectious diseases.

is no one younger that can take on Trump. My hope is after Biden's second term they will work on getting young progressives to run. With what they are facing they will need one.

He knows where all of the levers of power are. You don’t get that as a fumbling newcomer to Washington.

I think of great two term presidents - Clinton and Obama. Even with everything they accomplished, if they had only known in their first term what they knew in their second terms … they would have been even greater.

You should consider deleting it.

The Constitution provides a lower age limit for serving as POTUS, but no upper age limit. In other words, the Constitution itself declares that while people can be too young to be president, nobody is too old to be president.

But I would be curious to know from the people who voted that Biden is "too old" why you feel that way.

To be clear, this isn't some kind of gotcha, because I expect that the people who voted "too old" will still be voting for Biden in November anyway (assuming they're eligible to vote in the U.S. presidential election).

But I'm curious to know whether your concern that he is too old is rooted in the actual belief that he himself is not competent to be president (even though you will vote for him anyway), or whether it's more about political perception -- you're worried that other people won't vote for him because they think he's too old.

You don't have to answer of course, I'm just genuinely curious.

When he first declared his candidacy in 2016 I was a bit sad because I thought his time had passed. Good man — missed his opportunity.

Then he ran that ad with the Charlottesville Nazi-wannabes and talked about the soul of the nation. That was it. Uniquely among our candidates, he got it and he said it.

No, he is not too old — he’s the best, and he picked a great VP.

talking point, given it further visibility and validity.

without it, I pass.

I doubt it.

That makes so much sense!!!

I will gladly vote for Biden even though I'm not ecstatic about having a president in his 80's. But as many of us have preached on here before, politics is about voting for for policy. The personality of the candidate draws in the middle people, the people who don't really understand how government works.

And that's what concerns me. Will the middle people vote for Biden? I think they will if Trump is the nominee. If Trump isn't the nominee, I'm not so sure.

There are other factors, such as the pro-choice vote, which has been very strong since Roe was overturned. Will that vote show up? I hope so.

It may be about who he chooses as a runnning mate, and he doesn't have any competent, realistic choice in mind.

When it's all done, and the votes are counted, I''d bet Biden gets close to 90 million votes, Trump comes in at under 70 million and Biden is over 400 electoral votes. Then we'll see how many scams the GOP will try to pull.

The question is not his age, but which team will best protect Democracy and the rule of law.

- Biden has a highly competent, moral, ethical and dedicated team: VP, cabinet, administration, and officials.

- Who does tR;ump have? Bannon, Stephen Miller?

Which team to you entrust our democracy to in case either one, or both don't survive their term?

That is the question.

Sheesh! What a stupid question!

And really fuck that guy.

The Biden campaign will be glad to compare the physical condition of President Biden to TFG

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

And mostly divisive.

Chump is also quite old and a piss poor option even at his peak as well as insane, evil, stupid, corrupt, doddering, narcissistic, staggeringly ignorant, traitorous, foolish, petty, and lazy.

Any other Republican would also be a member of the white nationalist crime syndicate, theocratic domestic terrorist organization, and more likely than not a part of an insane death cult even if it is to squeeze profits rather than fueled by some wild eyed nonsense from the internet.

If Biden is too old then he will become unable to serve and step down/be removed or pass away and in either event we will have a much younger President.

He is more than young enough to elect and that is as good as it gets or needs to be right now.

I supported him in 1988 and in 2008. He's always impressed me, even when does one of his "regular Joe" goofs. The substance of how he's argued throughout his career has always told me this was a man of parts, a man who could do the job. The plagiarism problem in '88 was really a matter of busy man not getting adequate staff support. How many senators even do their own speechwriting? But he took the hit in public rather than pawn the blame off on a staffer.

He's mortal. He's past his prime. I'll take his prime over most other pols. But his staff is hiding him these days. He walks like an old man. It only looks bad, but it's hurting us with younger voters. He's not had the political acumen to capitalize on the strongest economic recovery since Clinton cleaned up the Gipper's mess. Biden's messaging is off, frankly. This is not an election where we can spare any votes

Ballet Theatre. It's stupid.