Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A surge of young, mainly white voters living in newly affluent neighborhoods emerged as a powerful force in last November’s elections in the District, a seismic shift that mirrors the evolution of the city’s population and could reshape its politics in years to come.
For the first time in 40 years, voters between the ages of 25 and 34 outnumbered senior citizens, an analysis of election data shows. Also for the first time, African Americans, who historically have exerted the greatest influence over District politics, lost their majority among voters.
The young voters cast ballots in gentrifying neighborhoods such as NoMa (short for North of Massachusetts Avenue), the H Street corridor and Shaw, while turnout declined in working- and middle-class African American precincts east of the Anacostia River. The shift appears to have been a key to the overwhelming passage of a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana that took effect last month.
Legacy DC politics and voters are losing their clout in today's DC politics. These constituencies are scratching and clawing to maintain relevance, but that train has already left the station, as the 2014 DC election proves.
This is not surprising considering who has been buying property in DC in recent years this would eventually happen. With that being said I am not sure that is going to change things in a substantial way in terms of DC's party identification. It may just change focus on some issues.
...and in other news, water is wet. I'm sure this is not much of a surprise to anyone. Like DS said above, I don't think it will change the party identification, but I wonder how it will affect votes and representation on issues that affect lower income residents and the elderly.
This is not surprising considering who has been buying property in DC in recent years this would eventually happen. With that being said I am not sure that is going to change things in a substantial way in terms of DC's party identification. It may just change focus on some issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chariega
...and in other news, water is wet. I'm sure this is not much of a surprise to anyone. Like DS said above, I don't think it will change the party identification, but I wonder how it will affect votes and representation on issues that affect lower income residents and the elderly.
I happen to slightly disagree with both of you in regards to party identification. With the presence of Millenials, comes an uptick in the number of political Independents. This is important...especially if a movement to change DC primary election voting rules comes to fruition. As it stands now, DC Democrats are protected by primary voting rules requiring party affiliation in order to vote in the primary. There's already been some discussion in recent years to change that rule. I don't think its safe to assume that Millenials are dyed in the wool Democrats. If given a real viable alternative to the standard DC Democrat, they may well take it. Part of that leap would be to allow Independents to vote in the DC primary.
What remains uncertain is whether the marijuana referendum drew residents who are unlikely to participate regularly in politics — or whether a new electorate is taking shape that will alter the future of city politics.
I think a lot of those young voters would have stayed home if initiative 71 wasn't on the ballot.
I happen to slightly disagree with both of you in regards to party identification. With the presence of Millenials, comes an uptick in the number of political Independents. This is important...especially if a movement to change DC primary election voting rules comes to fruition. As it stands now, DC Democrats are protected by primary voting rules requiring party affiliation in order to vote in the primary. There's already been some discussion in recent years to change that rule. I don't think its safe to assume that Millenials are dyed in the wool Democrats. If given a real viable alternative to the standard DC Democrat, they may well take it. Part of that leap would be to allow Independents to vote in the DC primary.
At the same time, I don't see them voting Republican. They are socially backwards, especially for the type of millenial that is drawn to DC. Can an indipendent win...sure. Likely we will see more indipendents on council, and maybe even a mayor.
DC though is for the most part, politically speaking, an east coast version of SF. At least in terms of the white voting block. There will be some differences, but I think it will still be the Democratic party in charge. But it is likely going to be a Democratic party that is more familiar on the west coast than the east one. Again the party itself inside DC will change.
With that being said, change of this nature is hard to predict at the end of the day. The city is changing a great deal, and so are the political leaders. We are likely going to have a racially mixed DC council.
I agree. What's weird to me is that DC's "buttoned up" "highly educated" culture seems to lend to a pro-marijuana subculture.
This is not the least bit shocking if you spent time around these people in college. There is a reason why they do not do drug testing in Silicon Valley out west or at nonprofits in DC.
This is not the least bit shocking if you spent time around these people in college. There is a reason why they do not do drug testing in Silicon Valley out west or at nonprofits in DC.
Valid point. I myself didn't hang out with users and stoners in college. It's not a point of view that I can relate to.
I think it was more than just people who wanted to smoke legally who went to the polls on initiative 71. The failing war on drugs, the categorization of marijuana as a schedule I drug, and the cost (human and financial) of processing and imprisoning people on Marijuana charges was a big motivator for me. DC autonomy issues were rolled up in there too, so to speak.
I know a few dozen people in DC who smoke, but I don't know any that fit the description of the stereotypical 'stoner'. They're all highly functioning people who use it recreationally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
