“Trump millennials” might be a term you would consider an oxymoron if looking at the polling numbers.
Young people — rather overwhelmingly — do not like the GOP nominee or the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. These individuals typically fall into one of three camps: the Clinton-as-lesser of two evils voters, the Jill Stein voters, and those who decline to vote at all.
The more pro-Clinton camp has tried creating a narrative of fear that a vote for Stein or a non-vote is essentially a vote for Trump, essentially turning two of the three groups into Trump millennials.
Aside from that, the Hill reported earlier in the week that Clinton leads Trump among millennials by 48 percent.
But fears of what the controversial GOP candidate might do — or is capable of doing — in a four-year span given the current political climate are wholly unfounded.
America was created on a system of checks and balances, and if this election has taught anything, it’s that a Donald Trump presidency would have plenty of each.
Democrats are vehemently opposed to his candidacy. Less than 80 percent of Republicans are enthused about it either, and he is very much at odds with both Republican-controlled houses of Congress.
— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) October 19, 2016
He is wildly unpopular on both sides of the political aisle, in other words. While Democrats and Republicans campaign on different issues, there is a reason the federal government has grown exponentially in the last 30 years.
They divide on small issues in order to gain more power and control over Americans’ lives. Unfortunately, they often favor corporations, lobbyists, and big donors as a result. They are essentially the same party in spite of the rhetoric.
The election of Trump, for millennials, would actually be a good thing in bringing about the type of change the voting bloc hopes to accomplish. Not because the Donald is reflective of their values and ideals — he’s not — but because he would have virtually zero chance of getting his more harmful reforms pushed through Congress.
In the meantime, his election would send a loud-and-clear message to the Democratic Party that the behaviors linked to Clinton — her stacking the deck against Bernie Sanders, favoring of Wall Street and the rich, hawkish measures on military force, and general lack of trustworthiness — are unacceptable.
The party has already shown signs it’s willing to listen to what former Sanders and Stein supporters have had to say. But handing Clinton the win in November would essentially stave off any real reform.
Essentially, the Democratic Party establishment would be placed into a situation where it would have to back up these initial platform changes and prove they’re not just pandering to the disgruntled left.
As much as four years of Trump, to millennials, might seem terrifying, it would prove to the Hillary Clintons of the world that yes, you do have a voice and your vote matters.
It would essentially be giving up four heavily checked-and-balanced years in return for the type of reforms that could secure the White House in 2020 and lead to real change for 10, 20, or even 40 years to come.
In the presidency of Trump, millennials would be able to help set the course for the country they want to live in for the rest of their lives.
— The Hill (@thehill) October 18, 2016
But what do you think, readers? Are four years of Trump bad for millennials, or are they just what is needed to push out the special interests, pay-to-play nature of the national political scene? Sound off in the comments section below.