Why didn’t Biden anger young voters in the primaries the way other moderates did?

[darklordoftech]

Young voters seemed to dislike Hillary in 2008 and 2016 and Harris, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg in 2020, so why didn’t they dislike Biden?

[ProgressiveModerate]

I think it's because never really was very aggressive towards more progressive canidates, and was almost seen like a grandfather by many. I'm not really sure this is even entirely true though; I can think of very few people who disliked Klobuchar or Buttigieg because they were too moderate, but still liked Biden, outside of percieved electoral strength.

[Roll Roons]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

[If my soul was made of stone]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative, speaking as a queer person myself, and many were put off by his record on race relations as mayor.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

A mixture of his sexual orientation (in combination with other factors), his time in corporate consultancy, his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career. Only relatively some were driven by all four.

[darklordoftech]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative, speaking as a queer person myself, and many were put off by his record on race relations as mayor.

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

A mixture of his sexual orientation (in combination with other factors), his time in corporate consultancy, his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career. Only relatively some were driven by all four.

Aren’t all these things true of Biden as well? Isn’t Biden’s record on race relations as Senator worse than Pete’s as Mayor?

I also find it interesting that when Harris said she would legalize marijuana, people said, “She’s lying. Look at her career as Attorney General”, but when Biden said he wouldn’t legalize marijuana, people said, “He doesn’t mean that.”

[Sol]

Buttigieg is also basically "the guy who you knew in college who was ambitious in a gross and naked way."

[Hope For A New Era]

his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career.

The few that actually existed. He was mostly just a vague empty platitude generator.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career.

The few that actually existed. He was mostly just a vague empty platitude generator.

Well I don't really disagree all that much. "His chosen ideological stances"=the stances he took opportunistically. It was definitely possible or even likely that, had the progressive lane been less crowded, he would have run in it.

[Hope For A New Era]

his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career.

The few that actually existed. He was mostly just a vague empty platitude generator.

Well I don't really disagree all that much. "His chosen ideological stances"=the stances he took opportunistically. It was definitely possible or even likely that, had the progressive lane been less crowded, he would have run in it.

If I remember correctly, he actually started out progressive in August 2019 and became more and more centrist over time.

[sting in the rafters]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He wrote this essay extolling Bernie's virtues in high school and then immediately ran to his right when it was politically convenient. This caused many on the left to question Pete's progressive credentials.

Another reason is he suffered from a common issue in the Democratic Party. Much like how every GOPer before Trump tried their best Reagan impersonation, every aspiring low-level politician looking to get in the DNC's good graces does their best to recreate Obama's success. Unfortunately for Pete, he does not have a modicum of the charisma, online tech-savvy, nor the credentials of a community organizer.

As for Biden, his entire point of differentiation from other Democrats in the 2020 primary was he could win the general. Indeed, he has never lost a general election in his long political career.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

his chosen ideological stances, and his mayoral career.

The few that actually existed. He was mostly just a vague empty platitude generator.

Well I don't really disagree all that much. "His chosen ideological stances"=the stances he took opportunistically. It was definitely possible or even likely that, had the progressive lane been less crowded, he would have run in it.

If I remember correctly, he actually started out progressive in August 2019 and became more and more centrist over time.

What was his earliest campaign messaging like?

[YE]

Because Biden is more soft spoken and less elitist than the other candidates.

[kwabbit]

In my experience, even a lot of the socialists/communists that I know, who vehemently hate people like Hillary Clinton, still have a soft spot for Obama, as they came of age when he was President and their first impressions of him were very positive. This goodwill likely extends over to Biden, Obama's VP.

[Bootes Void]

-Biden didn't really try to appeal to the young left whatsoever in the primary while other candidates sort of did so he doesn't come across as a phony like the others
- Buttigieg is basically a know it all overachiever who doesn't have much accomplishments from his political run. He's a political chameleon as well.
- most other "moderates" weren't ignored but not taken as seriously like Klobuchar and a bunch of no names
- Biden does not definately loved by the young left whatsoever and probably got the 3rd or 4th most hate after Buttigieg and Bloomberg and switching back back and forth with Warren for the 3rd spot

[Alben Barkley]

In my experience, even a lot of the socialists/communists that I know, who vehemently hate people like Hillary Clinton, still have a soft spot for Obama, as they came of age when he was President and their first impressions of him were very positive. This goodwill likely extends over to Biden, Obama's VP.

Pretty much this. Although the real diehards of course hate Obama as well.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

The LGBT in the online left are very much unlike the broader LGBT community in both political ideology and experiences in regards to wider society, which distorts what their view of the overall LGBT community is.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

The LGBT in the online left are very much unlike the broader LGBT community in both political ideology and experiences in regards to wider society, which distorts what their view of the overall LGBT community is.

For whatever it's worth, I was being rhetorical. I'm just very disturbed by the "not gay enough" stuff that surrounded his campaign as if being gay indicates anything more than sexual attraction. It drifts uncomfortably close to "separate but equal" which I find philosophically abhorrent.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

The LGBT in the online left are very much unlike the broader LGBT community in both political ideology and experiences in regards to wider society, which distorts what their view of the overall LGBT community is.

For whatever it's worth, I was being rhetorical. I'm just very disturbed by the "not gay enough" stuff that surrounded his campaign as if being gay indicates anything more than sexual attraction. It drifts uncomfortably close to "separate but equal" which I find philosophically abhorrent.

Fair enough.
I suppose the most neutral way to put it is as follows: Many do append more connatation to the meaning of "gay" the way they see it. They wrap in it the negative experiences and elements of their life, and treat it as a mishmash of personal identity and lifestyle. The fact that a majority of American gays are white didn't really matter to them and probably didn't even cross their mind. What they saw in Pete was someone so mainstream and typical that they couldn't even consider him as belonging to the same basic classification as them.
I can even say for a fact that a few even doubted his orientation through it all - preferring to think he was secretly straight.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

The LGBT in the online left are very much unlike the broader LGBT community in both political ideology and experiences in regards to wider society, which distorts what their view of the overall LGBT community is.

For whatever it's worth, I was being rhetorical. I'm just very disturbed by the "not gay enough" stuff that surrounded his campaign as if being gay indicates anything more than sexual attraction. It drifts uncomfortably close to "separate but equal" which I find philosophically abhorrent.

Fair enough.
I suppose the most neutral way to put it is as follows: Many do append more connatation to the meaning of "gay" the way they see it. They wrap in it the negative experiences and elements of their life, and treat it as a mishmash of personal identity and lifestyle. The fact that a majority of gays are white didn't really matter too them and probably didn't even cross their mind. What they saw in Pete was someone so mainstream and typical that they couldn't even consider him as belonging to the same basic classification as them.

Which is fine. But the increasing acceptance of the LGBT community into American society means that the percentage of Petes in the LGBT community will inevitably become identical to the percentage outside it. And that's a good thing, because discrepancy implies inequality.

Besides, it's still logically inconsistent because presidential candidates are always our best and brightest (and therefore have a pretty mainstream lifestyle.) That applies to literally every demographic category.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He was seen as a bad representative of the LGBT community for being very white, mainstream, inoffensive, and homonormative.

I'm pretty sure the LGBT community roughly matches the racial demographics of America and isn't uniquely offensive or abnormal. Like what is this even supposed to mean?

The LGBT in the online left are very much unlike the broader LGBT community in both political ideology and experiences in regards to wider society, which distorts what their view of the overall LGBT community is.

For whatever it's worth, I was being rhetorical. I'm just very disturbed by the "not gay enough" stuff that surrounded his campaign as if being gay indicates anything more than sexual attraction. It drifts uncomfortably close to "separate but equal" which I find philosophically abhorrent.

Fair enough.
I suppose the most neutral way to put it is as follows: Many do append more connatation to the meaning of "gay" the way they see it. They wrap in it the negative experiences and elements of their life, and treat it as a mishmash of personal identity and lifestyle. The fact that a majority of gays are white didn't really matter too them and probably didn't even cross their mind. What they saw in Pete was someone so mainstream and typical that they couldn't even consider him as belonging to the same basic classification as them.

Which is fine. But the increasing acceptance of the LGBT community into American society means that the percentage of Petes in the LGBT community will inevitably become identical to the percentage outside it. And that's a good thing, because discrepancy implies inequality.

Besides, it's still logically inconsistent because presidential candidates are always our best and brightest (and therefore, probably have a pretty mainstream lifestyle.) That applies to literally every demographic category.

Indeed, it is a good thing. And yes, that is where the best candidates do tend to come from.
If there is one lesson to be derived from all this I guess it would be that LGBT culture is not fully, completely unified by anything other than, well, LGBT-ness. The great majority are Dems, but there are Republicans, roughly 1 out of every 5 or 6 if I had to guess. And of course like any somewhat large demographic category you will see at least some variance on ideological and policy questions. While this diversity of opinion is known to exist, it is probably not always appreciated fully.

[ElectionsGuy]

He did. I was following some lefty accounts at the time. Maybe it seems like he didn't because there were multiple targets for them (Bloomberg especially, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and to an extent Warren after the backstabbing). Biden, unlike the others, is and was transparently an establishment Dem, while the others were a little more dynamic in their rhetoric. Possibly, this meant that Biden may be bad on policy but you know what you're getting, while the others are pretending to be more progressive than they are. Maybe another underrated reason is his constant fumbles of words made some people feel bad to attack him too much because they saw him as elderly grandfather who wasn't purposely lying or deceiving.

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

He went nuclear on Bernie towards the end, and generally positioned himself as a "moderate" who used platitudes and cliques to answer questions, which the lefties who care about policy despise. Also, after backing many bold left-wing policies in the beginning of his campaign, he abandoned many of them leading to the (IMO rightful) perception that he's a gross opportunist who doesn't have any true convictions.

[Motorcity]

Also why did Pete disproportionately attract so much vitriol from the online left?

His original website was basically a copy and paste of Bernie Sanders campaign. He ran a progressive campaign but when wine moms took a liking to him so he did a 180 and ran a moderate campaign. He showed he was a flip flopper who cared only about getting elected.

He also ran as a candidate of youth and millennials. Except he went to Harvard and got a good paying job at Wall Street which is the opposite of the experience of most millennials lol.

He's also gay. Lots of homophobia in this country that people pretend isn't there anymore but still is

[Motorcity]

To answer the OP question

Goodwill from the Obama years. Most young people still have a positive view of Obama so it extended to his VP. And to Biden's credit, he was 100% loyal to Obama without question.

Biden also comes across as a humble and down to earth grandpa. He doesn't have a history of affairs or sneaky million dollar land deals or paid speeches to wall street. Just uncle joe who likes trains.