Going by those Iowa Democratic caucus polls (from CNN)…@
http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/ia/DemImmediately noticeable: The younger voters are not in agreement with the older voters for who should win the Democratic presidential nomination for 2016. Take a look at the income levels. A big gap there as well. (The people with more money are there for Hillary Clinton.) It's also interesting to note that, in a general election, those two voting-age groups combined outpace what is normally the turnout for the two youngest voting-age groups. And it's also the case with those low-income versus higher-income voters.
My own theory is this: The older two groups for Hillary Clinton have more the background for experiencing the 1990s with a President Bill Clinton. Using 2015 as the cut-off, those age 45 were born, at the latest, in1970. The 1988 and 1992 elections were their first as adults. But those age 65 or older were born, at the latest, 1950—and they appreciated the Clinton White House years. But, those who were born in 1998 (that CNN poll listed the youngest group starting at age 17) are not sharing that sentiment. And they don't share the same issues. (Starting with their incomes.) They don't have a shared perspective but there experiences are not comparable. The oldest group was there for Republican realigning election of 1968 and, twelve years later, for Ronald Reagan in 1980. We're a good 35 years past Reagan's first election. And what those 65 and older people—well-established, better earnings, some still working and some retired—are not having the same issues as those who 18-plus in 2016. The "Millenials" are liberal. (The 65 and older voting-age group are not.) The youngest voting-age group (and including much of the party base including Generation X who, perhaps, were born at some point around the mid-1970s), are wanting a Democratic Party which is aggressively liberal on all policies represented in leadership not just on the campaign trail but when serving in office (very much including the presidency). And the Democratic Party—with examining this—has to realize they have a leadership concern with regard for the direction of the party
before discussing more deeply direction for the United States. The party cannot run like it is 1996 rather than 2016. That is not where the nation is. If Bernie Sanders wins this 2016 Democratic presidential nomination over Hillary Clinton, a big part of what will explain is that he performed stronger with connecting and showing he is in touch. Hillary Clinton has time to rebound. But, she will need to adjust and become more aggressively liberal.
