Political Piece Draft 2

Youth Vote--Midterm Election 2010
DRAFT 2
Disinterest in the midterm elections was evident among American youth this year comprising only 9% of the voter turnout, when in 2006 the national youth vote in the midterms was as high as 26%. The Obama campaign was famous for wrangling in youth interest in politics, even interesting those too young to vote. After all, there was an increase of 2 million young voters from 2004 to 2008. More than half of the voters during his presidential election were between the ages of 18-29. 40% of those voters were absent during the 2010 midterm election.

The Republicans are now the majority seats of congress, making it difficult for Obama to utilize any of his plans for the remainder or his presidency.

During the 2008 presidential election, the possibility for change felt real. When students were leaving school to vote for him on election day, it goes without saying that they wanted to be included in this change that reflects the shifting values of the upcoming generations. Obama’s campaign was geared towards youth voters, drawing them in through appearances on stations such as MTV and addressing situations that directly effect young voters such as high college expenses. Celebrities entered the political world that year making voting a hot topic, but in the midterms it seemed as though there were no celebrities, few appearances, and young voters were not educated therefore compelled enough to submit their vote. If the campaign demonstrates that the young votes don’t matter, that is the message the young will hear.

Than Thangaval, a 24-year-old New York City resident claimed that he voted for Obama in the 2008 presidential election but did not vote in the 2010 midterms. “I’m not very into politics, I guess I don’t think my vote matters.” His disinterest in politics did not keep him away from the polls in 2010, likely because he felt political attention from the Democratic campaigns.

“Thirty six percent of young people said it wouldn’t make a difference who they voted for,” said political analyst William John Cox. “Young people are carrying the burden. The government has to change for the youth to change.”

In the 2006 and 1994 midterm elections, the youth vote estimated to be the same amount, 26%. Both of these elections resulted in the Republican Party gaining the majority of the house. The senior’s turnout rate was 63 percent in 1996, which was more than twice the youth rate. Polls show that older voters lean more toward Republican candidates, so that could be bad news for Democrats. And this year, it was.

In this election, Obama lost the majority in the house that he gained during his very successful campaign. His campaign in 2008 utilized all the unconventional public relation methods including the creation of a campaign social networking site (MyBO) where young voters could become involved and communicate amongst each other. These methods were very familiar to the youth, allowing them to have their own comfortable political sphere. He owes his victory to a large degree to the youth with over 50% of the voters between the ages of 18-29. Why did the democrats neglect this fact by not renewing these campaigning strategies during the midterm elections and reach out to the youth again? If the democrats decided to do just that, perhaps the final turnout would have been different.

President Obama showed attempts to maintain his appeal to young Americans when he rallied on college campuses this month in an attempt to motivate the young viewers to vote in the midterm elections. His effort was miniscule compared to his presidential campaigns, despite the fact that he needed the Democratic majority to help him sustain his political position. In the same way he was low key among the youth, he was almost soundless with the seniors who add up to about one in five voters in recent midterms. The young always receive more political attention than the old, though the old generally shape elections more than the young. That trend is exaggerated in midterm elections,” said David Paul Kuhn of RealClearPolitics. Seniors and baby boomers are more engaged in the election and more enthusiastic about voting, according to Pew Research Center data. With seniors more likely to vote, and Republicans holding their vote, it’s clear that the Democrats need to rally the youth, and hard.

There has been a lot of talk about the enthusiasm gap between the young and old when it comes to politics, but what this leaves us is a generation gap. In the same way that political decisions would differ by generation, what attracts the attention of adults will not necessarily have the same effect on our nation’s young adults.

“Because voting rates of young people tend to be relatively low, efforts to get them to vote almost by definition have to special and not purely conventional,” said the New School University's Professor of Political Science, David Plotke.

Ninety seven percent of youth ages 18-24 use social media websites. Reuters Institute for the study of Journalism reports that these users also receive most of their political information online as well. Newspapers and radio are nearly obsolete to the nation’s youth as well as following generations. This is justification enough to gear towards those sites to create political opinion amongst each other digitally and socially. The midterm elections this year was the first to properly and effectively use the social media device as a campaign tool, but although these devices were properly placed creating easy ways to mobilize the youth, users were still not convinced. The youth were not educated on what they’re contribution to these elections would effect in the same way they were in 2008.
In 2008, social media didn’t have the half a billion users as it does today. If the democrats took a stand and really displayed the importance, social media tools would have been a knockout.

Virtually every major social networking site was linked to the 2010 midterm elections in some way. Facebook had an “I Voted” button on its main page (reflecting the outdated sticker idea), The NY Times and The Wall Street Journal created applications on iPhones and iPads allowing users to monitor the elections live, and Twitter wins the award for the social network place for Politics, allowing their users to instantly interact live in ways such as posting photos of themselves at the polls.


During the midterm elections it seemed that Hollywood completely ignored the fact that an election was even taking place. Were we dreaming in 2008 when every A, B, C, and even D list celebrities out there telling every one on the planet exactly how they felt about the election? It’s understandable that presidency is the highest power and Americans are interested in the powerhouse, but the middle layers are just as important. Someone should let Oprah Winfrey know that her and P. Diddy have a job to do.

MTV, an outlet famed for its attention on youth, decided to ignore the idea that they could in fact influence and educate their viewers and followers to make political decisions. MTV created their own version of a race. Their 2010 midterm election candidates included Lady Gaga, Britney Spears and Justin Bieber. No real candidates were included. It was about the public opinion on which pop stars should be president, (the most popular) and vice president (Katy Perry won in this world).

Young Americans won’t turn out to the polls unless someone reaches out to them first. When Madonna draped herself in an American Flag two decades ago in order to send the message that “Censorship is Un-American” to the nations youth, the youth heard it. When Obama addressed young voters at events such as Lollapalooza, a mainstream music festival, telling them, “Yes We CAN,” the youth heard it. No events such as these were present this year in the midterms, and the percentage of young voters shows the effect of such neglect. Nine-in-ten local party leaders say youth political engagement is a serious problem. The outcome of the 2010 midterm elections would likely be poles apart from what it is now if the youth were more involved.