| By Assamite36 - Jul 14th, 2005 at 3:50 pm EDT |
More below the fold...
In the Daily Kos link I'm using emphasizes Clinton's pandering to the values crowd. But seeing as we're in a college-oriented blog here, I'm actually more concerned on the impact this will have on young voters. Back in 2000, when Gore chose Joe Lieberman (who, unsurprisingly, is involved in this as well) as running mate, I heard many complaints in the gaming community, who knew Joementum as "the guy who trashed Doom, Daggerfall, and Warcraft II." I even saw that choice make many surefire Bush voters (Then again, gamer forums tend to be pretty reactionary on the whole).
Now, for the sake of pandering to the mythical center, Hillary could potentially shatter the young voters coalition, who as everyone here knows came out to vote overwhelmingly for Kerry in 2004. Gaming is a way of life for most of us, and this latest move will not make many happy. If we are to win in 2008 with a solid young voters block, we should find a way address this NOW. Thoughts?

Comments are closed for this post.
HELLO-- does anyone remember how many people voted for Nader in 2000?
I voted Dem in the last two elections because I understand the importance and what is at stake... still, i tire of NOT having a party that I feel really and truly represents my best interests and won't sell me out to the highest bidder...
Still, I think the coarsening of culture is a valid concern for some people, but it's certainly not a policy issue and there are definitely bigger fish to fry. I think Jon Stewart hit it on the nose yesterday when he gave Bernard Goldberg a beating on the daily show yesterday over the 100 People Screwing Up America book. LA and DC may have the same type of people but it's DC that actually has any power.