Summary:

Democrats are becoming increasingly concerned about a possible drop in Black voter turnout for the 2024 presidential election, according to party insiders. The worries arise from a 10% decrease in Black voter turnout in the 2022 midterms compared to 2018, a more substantial decline than any other racial or ethnic group, as per a Washington Post analysis. The decline was particularly significant among younger and male Black voters in crucial states like Georgia, where Democrats aim to mobilize Black voter support for President Biden in 2024.

The Democratic party has acknowledged the need to bolster their outreach efforts to this demographic. W. Mondale Robinson, founder of the Black Male Voter Project, highlighted the need for Democrats to refocus their attention on Black male voters, who have shown lower levels of engagement. In response, Biden’s team has pledged to communicate more effectively about the benefits that the Black community has reaped under Biden’s administration, according to Cedric L. Richmond, a senior advisor at the Democratic National Committee.

However, Black voter advocates have identified deep-seated issues affecting Black voter turnout. Many Black men reportedly feel detached from the political process and uninspired by both parties’ policies. Terrance Woodbury, CEO of HIT Strategies, a polling firm, suggests that the Democratic party’s focus on countering Trump and Republican extremism doesn’t motivate younger Black men as much as arguments focused on policy benefits. Concerns are growing within the party that if they fail to address these issues, disenchanted Black voters might either abstain or, potentially, be swayed by Republican messaging on certain key issues.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      In 2020 there were double digits dems in the primary…

      In 2024 we’re expected to believe the only choice is Biden or a Republican.

      If you’re pissed “there’s no other nominee” be mad at the party leaders who aren’t allowing a primary. And realize there’s 100s of people qualified to run as a Dem

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Double digit nominees…that all lost to Biden.

        We gonna drag them up again? So they can lose again?

        • Running_Out_Of_Plans
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          … That’s what a primary is for. So people can, like, actually choose.

          There are a LOT of people who don’t want Biden for another four years. There are people who didn’t like him, but have warmed up to him.

          Would he win a primary? Yeah, probably, because of incumbent advantage.

          But that should be for people to decide.

          • kbotc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Cool. The requirements to force a debate are all posted publicly. Find someone who wants to stop Biden’s policies and run them.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fun fact: if an incumbent President has a Primary, they are exponentially more unlikely to win the Presidency again as it can easily be spun into a “vote of no confidence” narrative.

        • randon31415@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There were four primaries in 2020 where the contest had candidates other than Biden and Bernie running. Biden lost three of them.

          46 primaries had no one under 70 running on either side.

      • o_oli@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Maybe one that isn’t older than average life expectancy already let alone after another term. Just an idea.

        • DarkGamer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Cool, if that candidate showed up and won the Democratic primary in 2020 I would have voted for them. As things stand I’ll go with the most viable one that’s most likely to defeat fascism. That’s the incumbent, Joe Biden. I don’t care if he’s elderly.

          • o_oli@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, I agree. If I were from the US I would also be voting for Biden. But it’s a really sad state of affairs there isn’t a better option. The system is ridiculous.

            • QHC@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              As an American, I’ll be the first to talk about the inadequacies in our electoral system, especially for President. However, I don’t think the tradition of incumbents getting the ‘benefit of the doubt’ and skipping a primary are a problem. They also aren’t part of the ‘system’, that is entirely the choice of the DNC. Presidents are limited to two 4 year terms, so why not run back-to-back? It works most of the time.

              The rest of the system is fucked.

              • o_oli@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The DNC choosing the candidate is absolutely part of the overall system. If that’s how it works, that’s how it works.

                Which, is ridiculous. Maybe it makes sense this term but the fact he ran last time also makes no sense to me.

                A country of 300 million people and the senile are in charge, like dude there are far better people for that job, just retire already.

                Is that ageist? Yes and I stand by it. People over 70 and certainly those over 80 are in mental decline. This is just the reality. Why have a leader in mental decline? Absolutely wild to me it really is.

    • Upgrade2754@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the DNC didn’t say there would be no primary on day 1 then we might have actually been able to see people step forward. Marianne Williamson is at least running on the issues and is physically capable of having a two hour conversation. Biden… not so much

      • Silverseren@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Marianne Williamson, the pseudoscience and conspiracy nutter that helped convince a bunch of people with HIV that medicine doesn’t work and praying and willpower would cure them instead?

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know why they’re so content to hitch themselves to terrible candidates. I’ve never in my life voted Republican, and the last time I was excited about a democratic nominee was Obama (RIP young idealistic me). Hillary had more baggage than a travelling circus, and felt a lot like just dead ass casting a vote for Goldman Sachs to run the oval office; Primary Biden made Jeb Bush seem like a live wire, besides not really having much to get excited about on his platform. Bernie was basically the only exciting thing the democrats have had going in soon to be over a decade now. The part has to do better.

        • DarkGamer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They had a lot of what I considered exciting candidates in the primaries; Yang, Sanders, and Warren come to mind. They didn’t win because they weren’t as viable or popular.

        • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          As if Biden wasn’t already a serious candidate with a provable winning record.

          Biden is clearly the better option and it shows by how much money the Republicans and the far right are dumping into “Democratic candidates” like RFK Jr and Dr. Cornell West. Which is also why the Right wingers and their “Democratic” proxies are the only ones trying to push for a democratic primary that would set a new precedent by primarying an incumbent Democratic President.

          The only person this infighting about these unqualified challengers to Biden helps is Trump or whatever MAGA loyalist that replaces him once Trump finally winds up in prison. (Hopefully)

      • Chaser@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Capable of a two hour conversation maybe, but a strong candidate? Not even close

        • Upgrade2754@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think if there was a regular debate schedule it could have gotten interesting. But with the way it is now, you’re absolutely correct

          • Chaser@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think Dem debates would absolutely help to hold Biden to more progressive positions but no one worth the limelight is running (I’m sure partially due to not holding an open primary). I think '28 is Newsome’s race to lose. He’s got name recognition and is a pretty good debater in conservative spaces so far. Not as progressive as I’d like but I’ve been saying that since I could vote

            • Upgrade2754@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              He has definitely been positioning himself for it. The insulin moves are welcome, but the fact he let a single payer bill expire after promising to pass it leaves an all too familiar sting. But perhaps he can at least be moved on reducing prices for more pharmaceuticals and descheduling marijuana due to its legalization in CA. We’ll see.