Why do older and younger Democrats have such sharply divided preferences of Clinton and Obama?

Or, more simply put, young people are more emotionally-driven, and that bodes well for Obama who uses rhetorical speech as opposed to, y'know, what Clinton does.

Would McCain have any chance at all without the established media?

Is there a new generation of Republicans coming through the ranks that is very different from the current generation?

As such, do union endorsements mean anything outside of the resources they provide for campaigns?

Why is this, and why isn't Edwards doing better among this group?

I see it more as an internet thing.  Under 40's are more likey to hear/discuss politics on "the internets".  Therefore they are not relying solely on the MSM for all their political information.

More importantly, younger people are always more optimistic than older people.  For example, even in the 60's polls showed those in their twenties were more optimistic about Vietnam than other generations.  (That shocked me when I learned that.)  Older people are just more cynical.

I think low-education voters see the name "Clinton" and think back to how good the Clinton years were. Clinton helped the economy soar in the nineties, maybe Clinton will do it again for this decade."

Low info voters have almost no way of absorbing anything about Edwards's campaign.  Outside of his haircut and his wife's cancer, he hasn't had any media coverage.  The low-info voter only remembers him as Kerry's failed VP candidate.

I have heard a lot of blue collar types say they fall into the Clinton camp because of their fond memories of the 90's economy.  They just don't have the information to understand that Bill's policies in many ways laid the groundwork for their current economic malaise and that Hillary is surrounding herself with the same sorts of people.

--Many younger people see the Clintons as soooo 20th Century, if not as old fogeys.  Really.  I remember in the early 1980's when my niece referred to "The Lovin' Spoonful" as old fogey music.  I couldn't believe it.  But anything 16 years old is old.  (She is now in her late '30s and supports Obama.)

--The folks who became GOP supporters in the 1980s and 1990s were reacting to what they perceived as liberal orthodoxy, especially in the colleges and universities.  They saw themselves as cool rebels.  Really.  Now, after all these years of (incompetent) GOP rule and the debacle that is the Bush/Cheney regime, that stance doesn't seem quite so cool and rebellious.  Younger GOPers are libertarians and react against the theocons or they are Jesus Campers who love Huckabee.  This guarantees more years of internal strife for them.

--Edwards has been at it for so long that he doesn't sound fresh any more.  He also needs to talk more about where we are going, not just what's and who's wrong.  I don't mean in the sense of specific proposals but broad themes.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

Perhaps the younger voters can identify with the kind of criticism leveled at Obama - inexperienced, too idealistic, etc. - because they hear the same kind of criticism about their own ideas and plans. 

I think the older folks are more open to the idea that experience actually means something and they see Clinton as already having been "tested" in a sense.

2) "If McCain has really made his comeback on the surge, then why are his voters so unhappy with Bush?" Maybe because they read Tom Friedman and his ilk?  They are upset with GWB because he took a the "good idea" of toppling Saddam Hussein and implementing a "democracy" in Iraq, and ruined it by handing the reigns over to Rumsfeld and Bremer.  Meanwhile, McCain has pretty much always advocated using far more soldiers than Bush actually committed (its unimportant whether the US military actually HAS that many soldiers - its all a hypothetical situation).  So, McCain can spin the issue to make himself look like a "better" version of Bush.

3) "Is there a new generation of Republicans coming through the ranks that is very different from the current generation?"  Not really.  I don't think the Paul supporters will become dedicated Republicans - they'll stick with the Libertarians, or go back to their militia groups.

4) "As such, do union endorsements mean anything outside of the resources they provide for campaigns?"  Not much.  Sad as it may be, the political, economic, and social power of the US labor unions has been seriously degraded.

5) I have no idea. But one thing is very clear - logic doesn't seem to have much to do with the way many people vote.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

I think the media won't talk about it because they have no idea what this means.  C'mon, to people who are involved in the numbers thing for real campaigns, this is amazing.

40% of people that had gone to vote in SNOW went expressly to vote for "uncommitted."  Hillary has problems.  I thought that number would be half what it was.

Think about how hard it is to get people to vote.  And anyone (most people here) who have ran campaigns or headed up GOTV efforts can attest that even when people are energized many still don't vote.  Yet many many many people went to the polls in snow in Michigan in the middle of winter to vote uncommitted against Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Anyone who says this is over - for Hillary - is mistaken.

For some reason, it seems that Obama has some pathological and deep-seated psychological need for Republicans to like him.  Seriously.  It's weird.

From what I am hearing, it's gonna take a while for you guys up there to heal the party because people are upset.

Let's not kid ourselves, it was the party establishment in NH that "ensured" Hillary's win.

For some reason, it seems that Obama has some pathological and deep-seated psychological need for Republicans to like him.  Seriously.  It's weird.

What I just can't help but wonder is this: Haven't all three primaries been either open or effectively open? So anyone who voted for Ron Paul in any of these primaries, technically, did not need to have been a registered Republican just the day before.

How many of these "young Republicans angry with the Bush Administration" were, in fact, Republicans before this primary race started? How many of them will continue to be Republicans after the nomination race is over and Ron Paul has gone nowhere, as opposed to reverting back to say "independents"? And do Ron Paul's results change any when we start having primaries that don't allow same-day voter registration/party shifts? (When do we start having such primaries?)

The thing about Ron Paul is that he bears so little resemblance to anything else in American public discourse-- Democrat, Republican or "Libertarian"-- that it seems difficult to conclude his supporters are in fact "Republicans" even if that's what they're registered as on the day of the primary.

On the other hand, maybe we can conclude that-- maybe all these people are Republicans now and Ron Paul has had the net effect of slowing the Democratic realignment, since some block of young Republicans angry at Bush who might have stopped being Republicans altogether at about this point are now staying within the party as "Ron Paul Republicans"?

In all three states, Clinton lost the under 40 vote, but won the over 60 vote. Considering the amounts involved in these swings, sometimes as much as 30%, age is shaping up to be an even bigger divide in the Democratic primary than gender. Why do older and younger Democrats have such sharply divided preferences of Clinton and Obama?

Clinton is the brand name Democrat for older voters. Kennedy and Carter are only possible alternatives, and aside from them going back a ways, you don't see anyone with those last names running.

OTOH, Obama has, like, totally captured the young/cool/vibe thing.  American Idol, indeed.

Would McCain have any chance at all without the established media?

No.

Is there a new generation of Republicans coming through the ranks that is very different from the current generation?

Possibly, but... Remember how quickly the militias faded away, once the Versaillles Republicans figured out how to channel their anger?  I'm thinking this is more like another wave of something already present, and David Niewart at Orcinus and Political Research Associates are the places to look for insight into this.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"