Is this really a “blue wave”? Or is it something else?
This week on PodcastTalk, Emma Lembke and Steve Rosenbaum looked at the primary headlines and asked a different question.
What if the real story is that young candidates are winning?
After Michigan and a string of other Democratic primaries, I started looking at the ages of the winners and losers. Again and again, candidates in their 30s were defeating opponents in their 70s and 80s.
Emma offered an insight I hadn’t considered.
“Younger candidates have a better grasp on digital tactics to reach young people.”
She argues that Gen Z isn’t just more connected. They’re constantly exposed to wars, AI, climate change, and political dysfunction through their phones. That nonstop stream of information creates both anxiety and motivation.
As she put it:
“When there’s a constant stream of... how terrible the world is... that’s a propellant to go to the polls.”
But we also pushed back against the easy narrative. These victories didn’t come out of nowhere.
One of the conclusions I reached after digging through the results was this:
“The young and unknown mostly lost. The young with the movement mostly won.”
Years of organizing by groups like Justice Democrats, Run for Something, the Sanders network, and others have built the infrastructure that younger candidates are now benefiting from.
The conversation also turned to Larry Lessig’s campaign finance case, Citizens United, mobile voting, and whether our politics is beginning to organize less around ideology and more around generation.
Emma made one final point that has stayed with me:
“I really, really hope that it becomes trendy to vote.”
It’s a simple sentence, but it may say more about the future of American politics than another hundred polls.
Listen to this week’s conversation and let us know what you think. Are we watching a progressive movement, or the arrival of a generational one?
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.