The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

The Clickocracy

Young Voters, Engaged and Online

By Jose Antonio Vargas
Whoever wins the White House come November, this much is true: Web-savvy young voters will have been a crucial voting bloc.

The 2008 primary campaign, and especially the protracted and historic Democratic battle, buried the tired old adage that young people don't vote. Turnout among voters under 30 has increased since the 2004 election, and young voters now, by large margins, lean Democratic (as books such as "Youth to Power" convincingly argue). Two recent studies by non-partisan organizations -- by CIRCLE (The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement), released Friday, and by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, released today -- outline the growing trend.

Some 6.5 million voters under 30 voted in this year's primaries and caucuses, according to data compiled by CIRCLE. That's a record figure, said CIRCLE director Peter Levine, and the first time the youth vote has risen in three consecutive election cycles (2004, 2006 and 2008) since the voting age was lowered to 18 in 1971. CIRCLE's data shows that the overall national youth voter turnout rate almost doubled in eight years; it was 9 percent in 2000 and grew to 17 percent this year. In addition, of the 17 states in which primary exit polls were conducted in both 2000 and 2008, 16 saw increases in youth voter turnout, with some states showing a triple or quadruple jump. In the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, for example, the youth vote comprised 18 and 16 percent, respectively, of the total share of voters.

"This primary season the Millennials have gone to the polls in record numbers, showing they are an influential voting bloc in American politics," said Levine. "They realize what's at stake and the impact this election will have on their future and the
future of our country."

"All key indicators and trends point to a predicted record turnout of young people voting this coming November," he continued.

The latest national survey from the Pew Internet & American Life Project of Web behavior show that more and more young voters flock online to inform and engage themselves about the campaign.

While the Pew survey found that 46 percent of all Americans have used the Internet, e-mail or cell phone text messaging to get news about the race, share their opinions and help mobilize others, young voters were among the most active and intense online users. They watch and make online videos and use social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace to read news and get involved. Pew found that two-thirds of online users under 30 have a social networking profile.

CIRCLE and PEW's studies also found that Sen. Barack Obama had the edge with these net-savvy young voters. Obama was "the clear choice" among young Democrats, winning 60 percent of young voters and a majority in 32 primary and caucus states, CIRCLE said. Pew found that among all demographic groups using the Internet, young voters are "helping to define the online political debate," with Obama supporters outpacing those who backed both Sen. John McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton in their use of online videos, social networking sites and online campaign activities.

More than a year ago, when the Facebook group "Students for Barack Obama" was created by Bowdoin College student Meredith Segal, political pundits and online observers wondered what impact such online groups would have in the primary race.

It's no longer an open question.

This is the seventh in a series of online columns on our growing "clickocracy," in which we are one nation under Google, with e-mail and video for all. Please send suggestions, comments and tips to vargasj-at-washpost-dot-com.

Posted at 8:30 AM ET on Jun 16, 2008  | Category:  The Clickocracy
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Obama Delivers Father's Day Sermon | Next: Another Bush in the White House?


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Posted by: cinema | July 6, 2008 12:48 AM

qwkm bwgkr
http://msn01.freeweb7.com/com6180.html hornback clutch

Posted by: hornback clutch | June 28, 2008 2:09 PM

sgtl qifyrbxu lczbdrgx ojry mtsqe iouxfq fevjo http://www.mqsuwoirz.unvrgocid.com

Posted by: qumidx kfcu | June 19, 2008 7:42 PM

slcgfeqa alzrbojy vzkxyhumr lusvy gjlktf jwpv mfowcqi

Posted by: lpbaquw apdm | June 19, 2008 7:41 PM

mdsycvx qwya tdgnv ouwfbj rxzisacyn lmxkfo tebzguqry http://www.unfg.anqlmuov.com

Posted by: fnuervdl rbecogd | June 19, 2008 7:34 PM

lqkzhyjc ckbshguwn sbjyok dhub ojmpn ljfq vestqozh

Posted by: stpljmx kztr | June 19, 2008 7:34 PM

njzl uvgsolm tboh hvsdrzc oeiqcw dwamygr netrxh http://www.lozha.xailnrb.com

Posted by: xdocqg xwivf | June 19, 2008 7:27 PM

yifjs qhpwsdrjm omsaft kepvlurtw dspkt qwybj fumkl

Posted by: puzxoymhg isvou | June 19, 2008 7:26 PM

fdsxehjry xlfghmi ofmepuxth bdejfz bnlzhw eplhixz itjcmh http://www.zbomgqnre.mgcsji.com

Posted by: ouafyw yzejdb | June 19, 2008 7:19 PM

leas sjlng jveiknpm pwgtbyxc hyarbw ovfk hxdwpe

Posted by: ctpsrhafj grmspybch | June 19, 2008 7:19 PM

He said it better than I can....

No matter what your political convictions are this is an eye opener. What a thankless people we are!!!

Subject: Jay Leno on President Bush (Surprising).

Jay Leno wrote this; it's the Jay Leno we don't often see....

As most of you know I am not a President Bush fan, nor have I ever been, but this is not about Bush, it is about us, as Americans, and it seems to hit the mark 'The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some Poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right?

The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the President. In essence 2/3 of the citizenry just ain't happy and want a change. So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, 'What are we so unhappy about?''

A.. Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 Days a week?

B.. Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter?

C.. Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job?

D.. Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?

E.. Maybe it is the ability to drive our cars and trucks from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state?

F.. Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter?

G.. I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough either.

H. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all and even send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.

I.. Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home.

J.. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames, thus saving you, your family, and your belongings.

K.. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss.

L.. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90% of teenagers own cell phones and computers.

M.. How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world?

Maybe that is what has 67% of you folks unhappy.

Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. , yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have, and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.

I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?

Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so unhappy you couldn't take a look around for yourself and see all the good things and be glad? Think about it......are you upset at the President because he actually caused you personal pain OR is it because the 'Media' told you he was failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day. Make no mistake about it.

The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an 'other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discha rge after a few days in the brig.

So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans?

Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized, try to defend their actions by 'justifying' them in one way or another. Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book about how he didn't kill his wife, but if he did he would have done it this way......Insane!

Turn off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as country. There is exponentially more good than bad. We are among the most blessed people on Earth and should thank God several times a day, or at least be thankful and appreciative.' 'With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, 'Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?'

Jay Leno

Posted by: xantiphi | June 18, 2008 11:06 AM

Thank you NG, your parents did a great job.
Great comment you posted.

Posted by: xantiphi | June 18, 2008 10:05 AM

YOUNGSTUDENT SAYS:

Also,
We are all guilty of the things we accuse each other of doing. If some of you said the things you say on these blogs in a public forum, you would be cast out as close-minded, racist, sexist, or just plain idiotic. We are all racist if we believe Obama is racist. A man, who Biracial, will ahve to have some white people, and some black people, and any other people he needs, in order to do what he needs to do to possible lead our nation to better days.
If you (Democrats and Republicans) can only find the bad or negative in stories and speeches, then maybe you should re-think what you're looking for.

Posted by: youngstudent | June 17, 2008 1:07 PM

YOUNGSTUDENT SAYS:

I still dont understand the logic behind old Hillary supports switching to McCain. WHy would they do that if the two had very different veiws and goals? If McCain were elected and it turned out to be the same old Bush/Republican politics, wouldnt it be old hillary suuporters' fault. At that point, what pride or feelings would a former Hillary supporter have knowing they contributed to a more unsatble U.S. in 2011, for example, just to get back at their own party in 2008. What sense does that really make?
Its great that young people are getting involved with choosing where our country ends up in the coming years, but it's not so good when obvious "boomers" or even youg people as well contaminate these comment sections with useless and baseless rants filled with hate and racism for fellow Americans. Have some foresight. We all have to look beyond the juicy stories that Fox news and MSNBC feed us. We have to realize, as hopefully intelligent people, that the media is biased towards Obama. People say they hate him for "throwing some people under the bus," or rejecting their support, but they also hate him for having some kind of association with those people."
Sounds to me like we're all looking for a reason to hate each other.
Election time is coming fast, and we should focus on our well being based on our current status as a nation with a failing economy. Not McCain's inablity to read a teleprompter or Obama's race. Whether people think Obama is being discriminated against, or people think Obama is being racist somehow (how I still don't know), we should be bigger people and be adults and not feed into it. If no one brings up race, maybe we can move past it.

Posted by: youngstudent | June 17, 2008 12:31 PM

It's not just the young! Us "older' folks are online and engaged as well. Let's all go to vote in November -- young and old alike. It's our responsibility to do so.

Posted by: abby0802 | June 16, 2008 11:53 PM

"SLEEP DEPRIVATION" yields 57 states? lol I guess I should tell my investment banking colleagues to sleep more or else we will have a lot of off by 7 valuations! haha What a retard.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:26 PM

aspergirl/trager--DO THEY HAVE OXYGEN ON YOUR PLANET?

Under 30--
I RESPECT THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF OUR YOUTH AND KNOW YOU CAN UNDERSTAND ALL THE ISSUES TO ENABLE YOU TO CHOOSE FOR YOURSELVES--THE IDEA YOU WILL TAKE THE COUNTRY BACK IS LAUGHABLE. THEIR ARE TOO MANY OF US "BOOMERS" AROUND!!
O0BAMA "08!!


The 527s are going to pummel Obama and McCain is running too high in the polls right now

16 JUNE 2008==YOU ARE INCORRECT. OBAMA IS AHEAD OF mcbrainless INCLUDING , GASP, WOMEN!!

Whoever hasn't heard the Obama and his "57 states" claim should look at this
MMM, CAN WE SAY "SLEEP DEPRIVATION"?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:13 PM

I think everyone should look at Senator Obama's endless sea of money which is I understand some, a small percentage comes from online contributions. I am talking about the millions, like 250,000,000 that came from Contract Defense Attorneys. I am talking about the 100,000 contributed by Rezko, and millions from Wall Street and London and billionaires.

Some of you say why should we concerned? The huge amount of money, more than any republican ever has had available is one factor. Another is that we do not know anything about this man who suddenly came on the scene in 2004 and that the DNC groomed since 2004, to become President. Its how this happened that upset so many. One would have to blind and deaf not to have seen and heard what Obama's campaign, along with the bloggers online, the media, all with Obama's blessings and the DNC, did to Senator Clinton. I was on reading the blogs since janurary and I cannot believe the mentality and language of what I read coming from the Obama fans.

Hillary was asked to leave since januray, even though with her rightful delegates from MI and FL she was leading. consistantly, asked for months to step down for the party. The rules were changed for Obama, the caucaus's were not all valid, only as good as the person who counted. Hillary won nearly all the primaries and Obama wonall the caucaus's.
Since March, there had been 12 primaries and Hillary won 9 of the 12. That is 75% of the recent votes in states around the country. From Texas to PA, IN, WV, OH, NM
AZ and so forth. She has had more votes than any president ever! However, the DNC and Obama's campaigne did not have the dignity to wait until S.Dakota and Montana closed, to announce taht Obama had secured enough delegates by stronarming the superdelegates, and by cutting the delegates 1/2 and giving some of Hillarys to Obama from Michigan and so forth and so on.. So NO my argument isn't just with how unqualified Obama is, with his lack of experience and world travel, or his white racists attitudes and his hate for the united States, from the friends we have proven that he associates with.

My problem is that he doesn't feel he needs to esplain himself, or to answer questions, and his attitude with flipping Hillary the finger, these are not great presidential strenghts. Thisis what kids like to support.

If anyone else feels that Hillary should be going to the convention you can go to one of the 100 or so grass roots sites that have been organised this week and put into one name. www.justsayno.com and www.puma.com .Puma stands for (political unity my -ss).

Senator Clinton does have the popular vote and can win, she was leading double digits in all the swing states against McCain. If you add her states up she far exceeds the necessary electoral vote (270) to become president, and Obama falls short by about 50 electorial votes. (220).

Many of the grassroots organizations will be supporting Hillary on write ins and many will support McCain. We are 18,000,000 mill strong.


Posted by: rlarkin | June 16, 2008 10:30 PM

"Those of you posting ugly comments here should ask yourselves if you would do so if you were not invisible."

crazyme, is that your real name? You should heed your own advice. This is precisely why you are voting for Obama- you don't have the ability to think logically. You criticize us for anonymity, and post under a fake name. What a TOOL! Question your own thoughts, and those of your cult leader.

Posted by: crazyme2 | June 16, 2008 10:29 PM

OBAMA - never , he is not qualified to lead this country...media attracrion-yes, for president? no. no. no.

Posted by: allan beltran | June 16, 2008 9:57 PM

Geez, people. I have worked on the Obama campaign for over a year and I am 61. MORE precinct captains and organizers are baby boomers like me, not students. Young people are on the ground and on the phones and in the trenches, THANK GOD.
But why are you so hostile toward youth? Is that really your problem with the Democratic nominee? Doesn't it inspire you to see young people involved in our government again? My brother joined the Peace Corps in 1965 because he was inspired by JFK. Since that time he has done more good for the world that I have, for sure. What are YOU doing?
WaPo must attract a lot of bitter Republicans becuase they know the tide is turning. Not just for the young, but for anyone who can still speak truth to power. Those of you posting ugly comments here should ask yourselves if you would do so if you were not invisible.
OBAMA '08!!!

Posted by: crazyme | June 16, 2008 9:27 PM

I now fully understand why all the vile, profane, sexist and anarchist comments have continually been posted by Obama supporters throughout this campaign.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 8:00 PM

I agree that Obama will not be a dictator and cannot singlehandedly institute socialist policies, but I am also not in favor of him or others like him being in positions of power to institute policies like that where they can.
Saying "the rich pay less" is a scam. What is a definition of rich anyhow? It's always some figure someone thinks of that is more than they make or more than most make - an easy target. I'd never support a tax policy like this...but what if you were incented to make more by paying more tax on lower income. Boy, I want to figure out how I make more so I pay less percentage in taxes. I know that wouldn't fly...but it changes your paradigm of thought. Is it fair that so few (1% pay ~40% of income taxes)? That's not equality. Let them decide where to spend their money. Where in the Constitution is it written we are authorizing our government to spend our money like they are....yes earmarks are a part...yes REPUBLICANS are guilty as well. And I call their offices to tell them too!

Obama will try to raise taxes. GW lowered them (even on those making $50K w/kids - middle class). Yup, millionaires got a couple hundred grand tax break and we got less...but it's relative and thank god I can aspire to make more money and not feel penalized...at least in theory with Republicans.

I want to a strong military and it's the job of the government to provide it. Sorry, history shows peace through strength...and we're not perfect...but more aspire to be here than not. Our people live amongst the top 3% in the world and we complain because we have cell phones, SUVs, LCD tvs and want someone else to provide healthcare and long term care. Talk to your insurance rep and buy it. Make it a priority for you. Don't demonize drug companies that provide what WE WANT. Don't demonize oil companies that provide what WE want. Don't want it...think of the next best thing. We're not holding you back...don't wait for someone else to think of it.

See...liberals gain power by making some victims and garnering their support. Vote yourself a share of the treasury.

All these companies that get tax breaks.....they actually get some of their (our) money back. Lower cost to produce = more jobs for us. Why do companies seek lower tax countries? Better ability to use capital and not have a drain from government.

We should expect our government to be more efficient. How does a lower tax country do it? Less subsidies? Less entitlements? More personal responsibility? Expect more from less in government?

My parents really screwed up when they taught me personal responsibility and accountability. It turned me into this conservative that believes I know what's best for me...not some nanny state government.

What if all the "rich" decided they were tired of paying for all these things and decided to leave? Then what? A flat tax sure does make sense to me.

Someone made mention of "trickle down economics" and it worked. Capitalism rewards innovation, invention, etc. Those that choose to engage and make it also stand to make some serious $. And what do they do with it? Invest in your company and mine so we can do more things? Buy some boats so we can work? Buy some cars so we can work? They put the capital to use. The government does as well, but the problem with government is lack of efficiency and the fact that it never goes away even once obsolete. I choose private investment and direction.

Oh...and I think crooked CEO's should be strung up as well - personal accountability again.

Posted by: NG | June 16, 2008 7:54 PM

Whoever hasn't heard the Obama and his "57 states" claim should look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

His camp will try to tell you that he was joking, or using some higher level literary technique. Nope, the guy's even more retarded than Bush!

If McCain said this, the headline would be: "Old guy gone crazy." But if a young, charismatic black guy says it, all we can do is, say "I guess he meant it"? Equal punishment in the media for all is my motto.

Posted by: Joel | June 16, 2008 5:46 PM

I can bet that I am the only person on this entire page with any significant personal loss "due to this administration". My sister died while serving in Iraq. Most think I should hate President Bush, but I don't. She died serving the country she loved, in a war she believed in.

I lost a family member, and I choose to support McCain. She would have rather had someone decide the fate of our military, and both countries she died for, which has the experience it requires.

Posted by: Alexis | June 16, 2008 5:33 PM

*wronged

Posted by: YT | June 16, 2008 5:30 PM

Frank
I am a white guy living in the South and I really don't mind a lot of things Reverend Wright said. He has a right to be contentious after what his race has been through and he doesn't hate white people. Society still has a great deal of subtle social injustice and it is important that, to some degree, we are mindful of it. America has wrong a multitude of peoples over the years and it's time that it changes its ways. Cut Wright some slack. Besides, even if everything you say is correct and Obama is elected with his hatred of whites. How could this realistically manifest itself in any kind of policy? It would have to be better than a continued neoconservative deaf ear that reifies our perceptions of others...

Posted by: YT | June 16, 2008 5:28 PM

The real problem with this presidential race is that it is actually all about race, and nobody wants to admit it. Well, socioeconomics to be exact (race, income, age, etc.). I think what needs to happen is that people in certain classes need to listen to both sides before declaring their allegiance. People in certain classes have pronounced Obama the president, and don't even know the name of the other candidate! The young folks and the minorities seem hell bent on getting this guy into office no matter what he says, and I think that is just foolish.

Posted by: Jerome | June 16, 2008 5:17 PM

Obama clearly has some kind of hidden animosity towards white America. How could he listen to his preacher for 20 years and not notice his position? How much of that sunk in? I personally feel he is a bit racist.

Posted by: Frank | June 16, 2008 5:15 PM

Can't you understand why people may be that way Mary? Perhaps, why we're a little bit angry? It's like people are intentionally trying to avoid paying attention to reality.

"Obama wants 75% of your money!"
"Obama will make the USA Socialist!"
"Obama's a plant from the terrorists!"

Seriously? Can people believe any of this? He's running for president, not Dictator. Some people are getting very silly about all of this. He doesn't have the power to single handedly make our country into France, 1930's Germany, or the USSR.

I'm not a democrat, I'm an independent who believes that people should get what they pay for from the government. I'm going to vote for anything that's not Bass Awkards.

Seriously, why the heck are we outspending the rest of the planet on our military? That's not even how we keep power in the world anymore!

Why aren't Multi-national cooperations paying simple things like income taxes yet getting money from our government? Since when did the government become more concerned about cooperations than citizens?

Why is the government getting bigger and bigger despite having the "Smaller Government" party in office for 5 of the last 7 presidents? Beyond this, the government has never attempted to be so invasive in it's citizens lives with the notable exception of the Japaneses-Americans during world war two. I believe we can all agree that was a mistake, and it stands as a sign that we are currently following a very slippery of government invasiveness.

Not to mention, we need someone who can end the War on Terror. Seriously, it's not even something which can be won due to the simple way humans are. People will always hate us so long as we treat them like lesser beings and force them to see things our way.

What are we to do but vote for someone who's diffrent and at least makes some sense on national and international manners? That person clearly isn't McCain, he's aiming to repeat the mistakes which jaded the middle east against us, not to mention get us stuck in a conflict which too many of my friends have already died in.

Pretty much, for most of us, it's either Change or Revolution. I'm still willing to work on changing the current system, but if things get too badly clogged up, sometimes you just have to throw the old one our and replace it with something new.

That's the kind of anger which is present in the people right now.

Posted by: Incarnal | June 16, 2008 5:06 PM

no one is stopping you from typing your opinion in and hitting the comment button mary

some may disagree
god forbid you have to defend your opinion

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 4:45 PM

This is my first month of using blogs and I certainly have learned that there are some level headed young people using these blogs, but I have also learned that the young people who support Obama tend to be sarcastic, rude, dreamers, not willing to listen or let another person express an opinion, and just plain brainwasher. I truly feer for our great nation with these many young people who certainly need wisdom.

Posted by: Mary Nugget | June 16, 2008 4:37 PM

I'm young at heart, 61, and hopeful. I love the Internet! I can get so much more done, without wasting gas from the comfort of my home. I can make connections with like-minded people.
I started loving the computer when I realized I could be anywhere at any moment with just the click of a key or mouse.
Being on the Internet opens up a new world every day.
So I found this post and wanted to say:

I want the changes that Hillary Clinton wants to make.
Because of her there will be no military draft, or 75% of young people's salary going to the government, or poverty-ridden parents to care for, or having to wear masks to filter the air, or UV protection clothes. As long as she is a leader, we can follow with confidence. We can solve our daily problems.

And young women everywhere can continue to express their opinions with a sense of entitlement. Hillary would cement that.
Even as a vice president.

Think about it. Remember when she took on:
Health insurance companies - the ones you need to take care of your parents and grandparents, and soon you and your children

The drug industry that insists Medicare has to pay their suggested retail price for pills. Those $320 special antibiotics don't have to cost that much.

All politicians who were being funded by the same industries.

She was fearless, rolled up her sleeves and learned more about our healthcare system than any other reformer. Sure, she went up against huge odds. Yes, the quality may not have been the greatest, but she did her homework and figured out how to pay for it. The financial dilemma was solved.

And when she lost, did she give up. Nope. She's the kind of human we all want to be. She worked tirelessly with others and made sure children had healthcare - unlike what today's insurance companies cover.

She went to bat for fireman who got sick cleaning up after 911. For families who lost loved one who died because they worked to clean up after 911.

She kept working, quietly, as a Senator. No grandstanding, just the grind. Day after day.

Ask what you want in a vice president.
Think about the job. What does a vice president need to be.
Firm, guarding the back door, fundraising, keeping her own counsel, idealistic, being loyal.

That sums up Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Donna Davidson | June 16, 2008 4:37 PM

I'm young at heart, 61, and hopeful. I love the Internet! I can get so much more done, without wasting gas from the comfort of my home. I can make connections with like-minded people.
I started loving the computer when I realized I could be anywhere at any moment with just the click of a key or mouse.
Being on the Internet opens up a new world every day.
So I found this post and wanted to say:

I want the changes that Hillary Clinton wants to make.
Because of her there will be no military draft, or 75% of young people's salary going to the government, or poverty-ridden parents to care for, or having to wear masks to filter the air, or UV protection clothes. As long as she is a leader, we can follow with confidence. We can solve our daily problems.

And young women everywhere can continue to express their opinions with a sense of entitlement. Hillary would cement that.
Even as a vice president.

Think about it. Remember when she took on:
Health insurance companies - the ones you need to take care of your parents and grandparents, and soon you and your children

The drug industry that insists Medicare has to pay their suggested retail price for pills. Those $320 special antibiotics don't have to cost that much.

All politicians who were being funded by the same industries.

She was fearless, rolled up her sleeves and learned more about our healthcare system than any other reformer. Sure, she went up against huge odds. Yes, the quality may not have been the greatest, but she did her homework and figured out how to pay for it. The financial dilemma was solved.

And when she lost, did she give up. Nope. She's the kind of human we all want to be. She worked tirelessly with others and made sure children had healthcare - unlike what today's insurance companies cover.

She went to bat for fireman who got sick cleaning up after 911. For families who lost loved one who died because they worked to clean up after 911.

She kept working, quietly, as a Senator. No grandstanding, just the grind. Day after day.

Ask what you want in a vice president.
Think about the job. What does a vice president need to be.
Firm, guarding the back door, fundraising, keeping her own counsel, idealistic, being loyal.

That sums up Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Donna Davidson | June 16, 2008 4:35 PM

Oh, to be young, gullible and easily fooled, Pollyannns. If Obama is elected, he will turn this country into anothe France and/or socialistic country. You may believe this would be wonderful, but look at France: Corporations dislike doing business there; their employees have weeks of vacation time, very short work weeks, lower management demand (&get) company autos, yet their economy is terrible. The newly elected leader (a conservation for once) is attempting to repair years of problems. Friends in England carry "private health insurance" in lieu of government health care because they want decent health care.Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

Posted by: Ann Coleman | June 16, 2008 4:32 PM

What is the percentage today of all taxes -federal, county and city a wage earner in New York pays? If it close to 50% today, what it is going to be in 20 years? Is the goal of Obama to exempt over 50% of tax payers so the tax burden falls on the rest? That will make it easy to really soak the rich in the future. What will be the definition of a rich person in 20 years? Who is going to be left to pay the burden of all the baby boomers once they start retiring? The answer is the young of today. That is not fear mongering. These are realities that must be considered before we elect a candidate whose answer to every problem is greater government involvement in our lives and finances.

Posted by: Jeff in Orlando | June 16, 2008 4:12 PM

Oblama, Who will make the government Smaller then? The Republicans, they just made it the largest and most invasive it has ever been in the history of the USA.

What are we to do when the "Small Government" party makes the government larger than the Big Government party? I'm going to vote for the smaller government and less invasive, which is oddly enough, the democrats right now.

Posted by: Incarnal | June 16, 2008 4:08 PM

DDB

I know several people, and medical staff living in Canada that hate the healthcare system, and that it is horrible

Posted by: J | June 16, 2008 4:04 PM

JimInSoFlo

you do know that reagan had supply side economics and it worked...last I saw thats in the last 50 years

Posted by: J | June 16, 2008 4:03 PM

NG:

Fair thought. Dems tend to focus on the wealthier with taxes(have the burden), and Repubs like Bush and McCain tend to favor shifting tax burden away from the wealthier onto the hardworking but less fortunate. I would LOVE balance. Sociology shows that there has been class warfare for a long time as well, acknowledged.

We need solutions so that the government would not have to place burden on either class. What we have seen lately, however, is burden being shifted on either one. Given that, I can only think of what to me makes more sense. Let those with more of a cushion carry the burden to help make up for whatever deficit while the hardworking less fortunate do their fair share as well according to that which they can afford? Or, let the hardworking less fortunate carry the burden over the wealthier, and give the wealthier more tax cuts over the hardworking less fortunate? I think that is an honest question.

I absolutely understand your point, and it is valid. I acknowledge.

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 16, 2008 3:47 PM

It's hard to believe that there are any "conservatives" left. I think it is pretty obvious by now that socialistic fascism is by far a superior form of government. Of course as an under 30, I want to not be able to make decisions about my health, because I want the government to do it for me. I dont want to decide where to work or live, thats way too much effort to spend, because life is about fun. The government has millions of very well trained and intelligent people who can deicde that for me. I dont want to decide what people to help or donate too either, thats a waste of time, the government can decide that, because they will decide right, if they give the money it will certainly go to the people who need it most. Onward for the future comrades!

Posted by: Oblama | June 16, 2008 3:38 PM

Obama2008...I am not saying democrats are lazy...I am offering a suggestion on how to improve your economic status without forcing me to give a handout. Persistence is key. Think about what you want and go for it. Don't penalize those that have. The people I know with the most money are the most generous in dollar amount and percentage because they choose. Don't buy into the socialist mentality of redistribution. I have plenty of democrat friends who are hardworking and make a good buck, but they villify those that have more and target them to solve their problems. That's not a solution, it's class warfare. I am also saying that if the politicians who espouse the thought that the rich pay too little really believed it....they would give more to the government. Does Ted Kennedy take any tax deductions ofr shelter money? What about the Clintons or Obama or Kerry? Do you take any deductions? If so, why? In your mind, the government deserves more...why deny it? Oh...only people that make more than you or some arbitrary # should pay more....

Posted by: NG | June 16, 2008 3:36 PM

NG

In all fairness, your comment was a big rant about how your taxes are too high with one sentence about family values. Family values are beneath me even responding to. They are the most vacuous issue ever. But about your tax whining:
Did you ever consider that perhaps you aren't "GOING FOR IT" hard enough? If you need tax cuts and loopholes to stay afloat, maybe you're the one that needs to do better. Democrats are simply skilled enough improve their lives while contributing to make society better as well. So deal whiny conservative hick. Just deal.

Posted by: EDM | June 16, 2008 3:32 PM

NG

Indeed there are successful people of various backgrounds, in various registered parties, but if you take Sociology, you will see U.S. history of how on a larger scale, with the broader picture of what goes on in this country, you will be informed with explanation, backed by statistics of how hardworking people tend to screwed over as they pursue to climb economic ladders. Furthermore, when we get "certain special Republicans" like McCain who votes against Equal Pay, well that doesn't do much to help people who work and do their part of taking up on responsibility. Please, do not buy the "Republican" smear that generally, Democratic people are "lazy." I've witnessed plenty on the contrary.

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 16, 2008 3:25 PM

This is really Obama's election to lose. The key issue is that he has been too vague for many Democratic voters, providing messages but is pretty short on specifics. The real question is not who he chooses as a running mate, but can he motivate Hillary's voters to actually go to the polls in November?

Posted by: CS | June 16, 2008 3:20 PM

You know...I think this is the greatest country on earth. And, I think it's great because if I want to go out and get a high paying job that I am am not penalized. If I want to invent something great, I am not penalized for enjoying the fruits of that invention. The policies of the democrats is to penalize people who make decisions like this...who want something better...and are willing to GO FOR IT. I know a lot of folks I graduated with that were very liberal and then something happened...they realized they didn't want the bare minimum. They didn't want penalized for going for something better. They started families and valued FAMILY VALUES. They took responsibility for THEIR LIVES and donate their time to help others, but despise being FORCED TO by a government. They became conservative. Again, to JimInSoFlo, go out and make something of yourself instead of being a drag on them. Your kind did not make our country great. Men and women like my grand parents, who immigrated legally and made something of themselves without handouts made this country great.

Posted by: NG | June 16, 2008 3:18 PM

Alright for the youth! My am I pleased in that you can think, sort out the problems and history, discern between the candidates' stances, identify with them based on where You stand on the issues, to let this nation know the direction that You envision for this country, but also based on possible consequences of how it will benefit you, your family, and friends. This country needs your voice, and we've needed your voices for two terms.

To the Youth: You are a bright, intelligent segment of people; you are also reasonable, non-fearing, accepting of people with slight differences in appearance or views. You are the future; you represent the 21st century America. You know the problems of this country, and you know the many ways it can be improved. Stay optimistic, as optimism plays a role in motivation to begin action. Yes We Can!! After these past two terms, we must! Come out in the ranks, droves, record numbers, strong with your just positions! Many of us from various backgrounds, in droves, will be right with you. Let this country go down in history, that we didn't continue Bush's policies, after Bush left office. It is time for a different direction this time around. Do not be discouraged by the naysayers, for they have already begun to defeat the purpose with the quick pessimism. Instead ask them, "What side are you on, for or against?" Ask them, "Where do you stand?" For all of those who will not help change course of this country's current stances, the rest of us are counting on you to give us a major boost; every one of you counts. I say: Lets Do It!!

Dems White House '08: For The Good of This Country, and ALL Of Us Citizens

With the power of a unified coalition, noone can knock us down from our purpose this time around. We are serious! You will be amazed at what can be accomplished with the power of unity. The youth counts; they are a significant part of this country.

To the Youth: Make some noise! Stand Ready!!

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 16, 2008 3:01 PM

I think that Obama will win as long as he doesn't select Clinton as a running mate. She will just hurt his chance to win with her old ways of thinking and old ways of doing business.

Posted by: Zack Tellbamn | June 16, 2008 2:54 PM

"Get off your high horse, your generation failed. Our turn."

One thing I love about youth: we're not beaten down, jaded, worn out and asphyxiating from lack of hope. We have the energies to be rebellious and inquisitive. So go on, tell us we can't do it.

One thing we will not do is live in the yoke of your fear.

Posted by: ABlake | June 16, 2008 2:50 PM

Posted by: informed | June 16, 2008 2:41 PM

Don't let the hate mongers get you down.

Pity them. They've bought everything they've been sold since this 'war' on terror began. They don't realise that it was specifically designed to keep them scared and vote republican (legitimate replublican votes based on ideology and not fear excepted).

But mostly, outnumber them. It's the best chance you have.


Posted by: Russ S. | June 16, 2008 2:35 PM

So if online activity influenced the primary so much, how come Obama didn't receive the majority of the peoples votes?

There is a catch to this online hype, voting is still an offline activity!

Posted by: Keith | June 16, 2008 2:32 PM

Hey all,

I read the article and lots of comments. I posted the top 10 on Obama because I really don't think he has a chance. But I agree that McCain is more of the same.

If you really want change, like I do, I'm voting for a third party. Bob Barr maybe.

Don

Posted by: Don in Chicago (again) | June 16, 2008 2:28 PM

I'm 40.

From what I've seen you don't get more conservative as you age. Maybe that happens later. But you do get smarter and more experienced. You see yourself better and you get more comfortable in your own skin. And the old adage doesn't hold. You can have a heart and a brain nomatter what your age.

To Obama supporters - you picked the right guy. He's the real thing. Maybe there have been others before him, but not in my lifetime.

But don't get to happy yet. The 527s are going to pummel Obama and McCain is running too high in the polls right now. The undecideds are going to go for McCain because they are risk-averse. And don't overestimate Americans' appetite for change. There are a lot of people who are not like you and will never change. They need to be outnumbered.

So listen up. Obama needs more voters, more people registered. He needs help getting them, so help him. Do it now, and don't wait.

If you make an effort you can change the world.

Posted by: Russ S. | June 16, 2008 2:27 PM

The under-30 crowd may full well be turning out for Obama in force this November. I don't doubt the possibility. However I dare wonder how much of that has to do with the fact that many of us have only been able to analyze the flaws of a particularly horrendous Republican, as opposed to a decent one (like Eisenhower or Reagan.) The election of Obama, if such occurs, may just as well be attributed to backlash as to endorsement of his positions.

The Obama campaign has been long running on the old and tired horse of "change," which in this case means that the candidate will turn Washington upside-down like no outsider since Bush 2, or Clinton, or Reagan, or Carter has... While I would appreciate the change that Obama harps upon in many aspects, a more humble foreign policy (like the one W ran on in 2000), a smarter energy policy (like the one that everyone since Carter has run on), or even an overhaul of the education system that has been failed since at least the 1990's; I've yet to see any details that the man can produce to indicate that all his genius has been turned to anything other than personality politics and an attempt to win the White House with platitudes, smiles, and "We can..." statements.

He's a good speaker, he's smart, but he is a politician at heart and any of us who place our Hope in him are sure to be dashed against the rocks within the first year if he gets elected. McCain's not much, if any, better.

Will the real Ralph Nader or Ron Paul or Ross Perot please stand up and at least make these candidates be more realistic?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 2:26 PM

Posted by: Foxas | June 16, 2008 2:25 PM

Top Ten Reasons Obama Will Loose the 2008 General Election

10. Hillary Clinton got mad that she loss the primaries so she took her ball and went home.

9. Florida and Michigan still refuse to accept any agreement except having two votes in the general election.

8. The soap opera known as Illinois Politics is getting ready for the season ending cliffhanger with "Welcome Barack (Kotter)."

7. Won't receive Abraham Lincoln's endorsement because he was a Republican.

6. The Vietnamese-Americans Interested in Ending Tensions and the Coalition for Obama in the Next General election against McCain is not a pivotal demographic in key swing states.

5. You say Osama and I say Obama, you say Hussein and I say Hussein? Obama, Osama, Obama, Osama...lets work the whole thing out. Imagine Dwight D. Eisenhower running with a name like Adolph Stalin Hisler. It just doesn't help the odds very much.

4. Can I hear a "Reverend White? Amen!"

3. Not enough boomers dying by 2008 general election to minimize the "Old Geezer" demographic.

2. The spy "Joe Lieberman" is giving McCain all kinds of political insights on the democratic party

...and the number one reason why Obama will lose the 2008 general election is:

1. "Change" has come to mean "I sadly regret to disown (any unpopular issue)"


Do you understand? And we haven't even mentioned Flag Pins.

Posted by: Don in Chicago | June 16, 2008 2:25 PM

I'm a Democrat but am voting for McCain. Obama's ties to terror groups scare me.

What if the people who spent years to prepare for 9-11 also spent years to take over our country by putting in their own President? That's change we can't afford.

Posted by: targa | June 16, 2008 2:23 PM

I'm a Democrat but am voting for McCain. Obama's ties to terror groups scare me.

What if the people who spent years to prepare for 9-11 also spent years to take over our country by putting in their own President? That's change we can't afford.

Posted by: targa | June 16, 2008 2:22 PM

All you hate spewing people need to shut up and sit down. You had a chance, several in fact, and you've done nothing but make it worse. Now we want to change things, actually improving them, and you're trying to hold us back?! And how do you try to do that? By scaring us about the future?! You're only showing your weakness, inaptitude, and fear of change. This adds fuel to the fire, not extinguish it.

Posted by: Peter | June 16, 2008 2:04 PM

Ok, this is where I start to get a little bit amused. Clearly being liberal is a bad thing, because the conservative revolution has done us SO much good! The government is smaller, spending and taxes are down, and the country is moral and safe.

Wait, no it isn't!
I don't know how else to put it, but your saying about how you need to have a brain to be conservative won't change the fact that it just didn't work out in real life. Much like communism, a conservative policy sounds nice, I'm all for small government, but that's just not the way the world works.

I'd much rather have a government in power than plans to be big, is up front about this, and uses the power responsibly, than a government which claims to be small and for the people, when it's really screwing the people over and becomes the largest and most invasive government in US history.

Get off your high horse, your generation failed. Our turn.

Posted by: Incarnal | June 16, 2008 1:59 PM

Freddie, "this" didn't all start in 2006. "this" started when bush took office. And just what has congress stopped. It seems to me a majority of what congress has tried to enact has been stopped by either Republican filibuster or Duh-dubya veto. He never once vetoed anything until 2006. Now he even vetoes health benefits for our troops. Boy, he's a thinker. Oh, I mean, "the decider". Duh.

Posted by: JimInSoFlo | June 16, 2008 1:52 PM

I once heard at 20 if you are not a liberal you don't have a heart. If your 40 and are still a liberal, you don't have a brain. There are a lot of 40 and older that are not going to vote for Obama and his liberal policies; they get it i.e. "have a brain."
Posted by: Jeff in Orlando | June 16, 2008 1:42 PM

For the record, not all of us in Orlando rely on tired cliches to understand the world. The rapacious corporatocracy with the best government and media corporate money can buy has proven disastrous. And, yes, the Millenials DO get it. I just pray my fellow Boomers will wake up. Even here in a city better known for its celluloid rats than its critical thinkers.


Posted by: Harry Coverston | June 16, 2008 1:50 PM

I once heard at 20 if you are not a liberal you don't have a heart. If your 40 and are still a liberal, you don't have a brain. There are a lot of 40 and older that are not going to vote for Obama and his liberal policies; they get it i.e. "have a brain." Lets hope the younger voters see the light before they become permanently brain dead and wake up one day at age 40 with all their money confiscated by a rapcious liberal government.

Posted by: Jeff in Orlando | June 16, 2008 1:42 PM

The biggest problem we face right now is the democrats are doing everything they can to undermine the Bush administration just to get their candidate into office. If they truly cared about the economy and the American people, they could fix it. This all started when they took over Congress in 2006.

Posted by: Freddy | June 16, 2008 1:37 PM

NG, "taxing the companies" is a very easy thing to fix. You give tax incentives to small business owners. That way, you are taxing the guy who earns over 250k at the rate he should be, but give him a break if he owns his company. If not, he doesn't deserve a break, he's not employing anyone, and you need to stop defending him. The simple fact is that I like the America of the last 50 years. That was created by Democrats and their protectionist, redistribution of wealth. It put together one hell of a great country. Your precious laise faire, supply side, trickle down economics is what we got for the many hundreds of years before the last 50 or so, and that created a society of a few rich, and the rest were poor. That's not the society I want to live in. It's also not a very productive one. Obama and Democratic protectionism '08!!

Posted by: JimInSoFlo | June 16, 2008 1:36 PM

Young voters - both of them. Waiting for WWIII and they don't even know it!

Posted by: Jon Iscream | June 16, 2008 1:33 PM

"Ideological descendants of Marx and Rousseau now lead the Democratic
Party and they have turned it into a disloyal opposition to an increasingly
accommodating GOP. They have molded the Party into a force working stridently
and unashamedly against a Commander in Chief during wartime. They have made
it a den of treachery devoted to American defeat in Iraq. They preside over
an institution advised and influenced by moneyed, non-governmental groups
and individuals with unquestionably anti-U.S. agendas who help make the Party
a pseudo-intellectual sinkhole filled with perverse, tried-and-failed ideas
repulsive to the majority of Americans. Those ideas are shaped into agendas
which are then forced on the public by an activist leftwing judiciary and by
a major media and arts consortium shot through with utter disrespect, indeed
contempt, for traditional American values, religions and institutions. The
Democratic Party has devolved into a club for the illegitimately aggrieved,
the self-absorbed, the self-hating and the perpetually [angry]. It is a
sanctuary where solipsistic malcontents and their disjointed causes find
refuge and support. It has long ceased being an earnest gathering of broad
minds where man's timeless problems are examined against the backdrop of the
Constitution and solutions to them proposed based on the actual realities
of the human condition...[Barack] Obama is in step with that radical element
and with that leadership." ---Rocco DiPippo

Costs $485 billion in 4 years, you won't recognize America .

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5152

Posted by: Bob Fanning | June 16, 2008 1:24 PM

Idealistic young voters have turned out in record numbers this year -- and not a moment too soon. Maybe because of the web. That is great. Less great is that ordinary citizens in Michigan and Florida where not allowed to make their voices being heard. It´s a scandal!

Obama´s campaign has been using the web in a cynical way!

Posted by: Elisabeth | June 16, 2008 1:24 PM

Age should not be a consideration, or race. However it does seem ironic to me that many voters, particularly younger voters (a catagory I fall into by the way) who are disgruntled with the president and federal goverment, are so enthusiastic for federal health care. Hmmm.. we don't like the federal goverment but we want them to fix everything and make them do it. By the way, we will pay them (or really us, the government) to do it. I'm not sure why so many people who dislike the federal government want them to take on more and more responsibilty for things, like that will fix the problem and be less expensive.

Obama is for change, but what kind of change, I'm not so sure.

Posted by: oh boy | June 16, 2008 1:19 PM

Those that believe that Obama will make all these changes stated in the mass emails and social blogs are sadly uninformed about how our government works. Presidents don't make laws, don't abolish taxes, don't change the economy. They may favor such changes, but Congress makes laws, Congress implements tax changes, and the Free Market is the strongest force to make change in the economy. Making pep-rally-like speaches saying the word "change" over and over again is a great way to get people excited. I only hope our young voters don't suffer from buyers remorse when they realize that the promises of chearleader fall way short of expectations in the real world of politics.

Posted by: Brian | June 16, 2008 1:18 PM

If only it really mattered who got president.

Posted by: Mike | June 16, 2008 1:18 PM

Bottom line...Obama is the same old bag of democrat tricks. Redistribution of wealth...tax the companies (in effect taxing us all again - cause companies don't print money and get revenue to pay taxes from us)...healthcare for all (ruining the best -although not perfect - system in existence while thinking the government can do it better (Medicare anyone?)...same old social security (cause heaven forbid we make a positive return on OUR money)...villify those that decide they want something in life and go for it, while making victims of those that don't. What happened to pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and going for it? When the young get out of school and get jobs, and see what UNCLE SAM takes from them they'll decide redistribution of wealth is not the answer. If it was, and Obama and other democrats believed the rich didn't pay enough...then why do they seek out tax deductions on their returns? If government is the solution, why are YOU seeking out tax deductions? GIVE THEM MORE if you want. Why isn't anyone upset at all the athletes and actors making the big bucks, but when a company owner does it is a problem? Gotta always take it from someone....the RICH...cause we can't have anyone buying those expensive cars we build, or houses we build, or yachts we build, or planes we build. Evil they are. Writing checks to philanthropitic causes....wanting choices....

Posted by: NG | June 16, 2008 1:17 PM

It's about time that the younger voters are taking over the responsibility of voting for politicians who will run our country. Unfortunately, I won't be around to see what happens when they become the "older" people - and the younger people will blame them for the state of our country.

Michelle Obama has already set out her assessment of life in America in 2008 that the younger voters can help to change. Here's what she said in South Carolina at an A.M.E. baptist church in Georgetown: Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. "We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. "Folks are just jammed up, and it's gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I'm young. Forty-four!"

Posted by: Marty | June 16, 2008 1:15 PM

I'll include myself in this demographic to some degree though it seems that, somehow, I'm growing older ;)

The youth that has sprung is built on a foundation perhaps 20 years old in it's slow making.
This foundation is built on a core of
'Bleeding Fist Liberals'
Those forged in reaction to both the declining 1970's that we ate our 'TV cereals' to and to the 1980's where we learned the appeal of speaking through strength but later matured to it's limits and cynical falsities.

'Push me and I will resist' can also be said for core innate deep seeded human ideologies.... and that is what we are seeing now.

It is a good thing.

Posted by: PulSamsara | June 16, 2008 1:07 PM

I have to point out that it was not the "youth vote" that put the most crooked, unpopular, internationally efacing, fiscally irresponsible president in modern times in office. If you voted for bush in 2000 and 2004, you should be ashamed of yourself, and should not be allowed to vote in 2008. You obviously don't know what you are doing, and don't pay attention to the issues when voting. (no, "I like him" is not a reason to vote for someone!)

Posted by: JimInSoFlo | June 16, 2008 1:07 PM

Young or old..get back to work!

Posted by: Tom | June 16, 2008 1:03 PM

Bush won with 13% of the adult population.

Half the population doesnt even register to vote.


Posted by: bruce Becker | June 16, 2008 1:01 PM

to the person with no name, whining about MICH and Florida.
Impeach the people in office who moved your date.
NH is the first primary, so that even YOU could run in a state with no cities, and size less than counties in the west.
The Republicans moved the date in Florida. See if you can elect Democrats to the state senate and stop the highjacking of the election. Why did the REpublicans want big states first?
So that ONLY the rich can win. Only the rich can win if states with 10 million are first. Any person can run in NH. That's democracy.
Stand up for democracy and drop your whining that the rich moved the date to help themselves uttterly dominate the choices.

Posted by: Bruce Becker | June 16, 2008 12:59 PM

No one knows how stupid they were in their twenties until they're in their forties.

Posted by: eldergent | June 16, 2008 12:57 PM

Young voters are less likely to be swayed by labels, and fear mongering. HE's ==> a liberal. He's ===> the MOST liberal.
What does that lable actually mean, in life terms?
Does it mean, he is most willing to look out for MY needs and interests? If the answer is yes, then the label has no power.
Obama is explicit. Obama will eliminate all income taxes for the 10 million most poor in our land.
Obama will increase social security tax on the 10 million richest.
Pretty simple to see why the rich are against him, as we saw yesterday, that the Wall Street Journal key people voted that McCain is better for the economy.
The trick will be to get those 10 million most poor to register, and vote.
Any chance someone sane in Congress will change the voting day from just Tuesday to all weekend, so the poor can vote too?


Posted by: bruce Becker | June 16, 2008 12:54 PM

I don't think you can predict that young people won't bother to show up forever. If they're anything like me, they're disgusted with the last few years.

I voted for Bush. Twice. I voted for McCain as my Senator every time.

This year? Obama. All the way. And all the fear mongering only hardens my resolve.

Posted by: Joe | June 16, 2008 12:44 PM

For years our politics have been hijacked by con artists adept at using the fear and resentment of cultural change to maintain and expand power. The victims of this type of manipulation tend to be elderly.
I would submit that the confluence of the increased activism of our youth and the unremittant mortality curve of the con-victim class, will lead to a vast political paradigm shift. It will in fact be shocking if Obama is not able to secure victory at this point. Then will come the governance challenge. I expect great things. I hope we are not disappointed.

Posted by: Ucanthandle | June 16, 2008 12:44 PM

These young voters rarely show up in the numbers predicted by the press on election day. The social interaction of the campaign is fun and it's a good resume builder, but on voting day I put my money on the over 50 crowd to show up and have the biggest impact on the final decision at the polls. Unfortunately that's Hillary and McCain's crowd and Hillary's folks are a risky bet for Obama in the fall.

Posted by: spikeaustin | June 16, 2008 12:36 PM

All I can say is McSame is collecting social security. Does he have the middleclass in mind as he cashes that check WE pay for?

Posted by: Larry Oregon | June 16, 2008 12:35 PM

Young online voters are engaged and voting for Obama because most are in college and have time to study the issues. Politics, political science, is the study of "Who gets what", money. So students are asking "Who is profiting and stands to profit from things like the Iraq war and high oil prices? " Think multinational oil corporations, not the American people who are paying for it. Students see through the smoke screens and false analogies of politicians. Students know politicians actions speak louder than their words.
Rich Republicans put up people like Bush to do their bidding. Multinationals do not care about America or Americans. Their bottom line is increasing their profits while Americans are being killed and our economy is being destroyed. Young online voters who are engaged in studying and voting on policy issues instead of personalities are the true defenders of America. We better all hope and pray they prevail or America will be the big loser.

Posted by: Kristen | June 16, 2008 12:09 PM

SG,
No one mentioned "free" anything. Please get your facts straight before you post.

Posted by: Jeremy H. | June 16, 2008 12:09 PM

euro:

I would like to point out first that the post that includes the term "hundred-year-old fossil" is not mine- a different Chris I suppose.

Do you really believe that universal healthcare is communism? Can't you name a non-communist country that uses a system like this? Are you disputing that the US is the last industrialized nation to not use the universal system?

We already get free education - and you pay for it - and everyone is equal under it - I suppose to you that makes us communists already.

Do you really think that Obama will bring around Communism? Or is that just a fear?

I don't relay on government subsidies and promises, and I sure as hell don't rely on the government using fear to make my decisions for me.

I pay for my insurance like many Americans, and would probably opt out of a universal system.

If we were communists you wouldn't have the choice.

Posted by: Chris | June 16, 2008 12:04 PM

I am laughing at the under 30 that want "free" Canadian healthcare and believe Obama is a uniter. I am 31 and nothing is free. The Constitution of the USA doesn't give our government power to offer "free" healthcare or re-distribute wealth. Want healthcare - quit spending money on other things and make it a priority. Want more money for things? Get a better job. Tired of high gas prices? Get a better car or motorcycle or bike or use public transportation. Don't demonize a group fo companies that offer excellent salaries and employment to hundreds of thousands of people while offering good investments to millions of people. I can't believe how much the Obama crowd seem like socialists. Always willing to do something with someone elses money, but not their own.

Posted by: SG | June 16, 2008 12:03 PM


Are you on the Obama payroll?

Do you just suck up and spit out anything Obama's campaign spins your way?

Geezus. Journalism is dead.

Arm chair tabloid junk news. Check out counter garbage.

May as well just call yourself his website.

NOVEMBER = NOBAMA

Obama has been stepping in it since day one.

God Bless America

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:58 AM

I find it telling that a good portion of so called "older" voters (however, you never know if they are just republican trolls posing as democrats anyhow)insult younger voters for having a) an opinion that differs from theirs, b) facts to back up their opinion and, c)hope that our government can improve and deliver upon it's promises. If you want to have a discussion stick to the facts rather than unsubstantiated hearsay. Put your money where your mouth is instead of calling us names and labeling our values with your ideological views. If you want respect, you need to give it as well. Thats just plain common business sense and good manners.

A young democrat for Obama.

Posted by: Steve | June 16, 2008 11:56 AM

From a young voter who uses the internet and has realized that real good change is better than Hope for Chage...

Ron Paul '08...use the internet to look him up. Seriously, how could you have an article about the internet in this campaign and not mention Dr. Paul. HA!

I know, he won't be on the ballot ok.

I will take my pen and write him in. He is my President no matter who is in the White House. So don't blame me in a few years...I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Posted by: Chad Peace | June 16, 2008 11:48 AM

Actually, Senator Obama is a great Democratic candidate because he's been bringing people together in good, new ways. That's what we need after the past 7 years of Bush angering the country, and Bush has only favored a select few (namely, the super-wealthy and oil companies). And Senator McCain will just continue Bush's awful policies. When you look at the numbers and arguments, Senator Obama is doing better than that.

Senator Obama is drawing together women, the Latino community, young people, the African American community, white voters, and many more. He's bringing people together both at his events and over the Internet. He's built an impressive base, an amazing network of people, and his economic plan will help the average American, who makes less than $250,000.

Senator Obama is the better candidate because he knows what the average American needs and he has stronger networking skills (in both life and online). Senator McCain, in contrast, doesn't see the value of networking (in life or online), and his economic plan favors the super-wealthy. We need a candidate who helps normal Americans - and that's Senator Obama.

To learn more about Senator Obama - visit his website: http://www.BarackObama.com

Posted by: Allen | June 16, 2008 11:41 AM

To the young person who said he wanted Health Care like Canada:

Ummm, no you probably don't....

There are a many great things that are deliberately misrepresented about Canadian Health Care. I was born in Canada and have lived about 2/3 of my life there. Michael Moore did not. He is dreaming as well as deceiving you.

The Canadian government is quite willing to let people die waiting for health care. They think it is pretty much OK to spend your paycheck on a big screen TV but it is not OK to spend your money on your own health.

Young person, you have no idea as to how limited diagnostic tests are in Canada or how long you will wait to see a doctor. The government has to limit the number of doctors so it can limit the amount of money it spends on health care....

It also limits the kinds of procedures it will pay for, and the ages of the persons it will perform it on. Canadians have to come to the USA for some specialized care. Canadian politicians are notorious for coming to the USA for healthcare -- and then denouncing American healthcare.

You will pay much, much higher taxes for the "benefit" of having reduced access to health care. (And Canada doesn't even have much of a military to support.)

Posted by: Carol | June 16, 2008 11:41 AM

Idealistic young voters have turned out in record numbers this year -- and not a moment too soon. Maybe because of the web. That is great. Less great is that ordinary citizens in Michigan and Florida where not allowed to make their voices being heard. It´s a scandal!

Obama´s campaign has been using the web in a cynical way!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:41 AM

Chris,
why is this crowd of sub-30 "free thinkers" so reliant on Gov't subsidies and promises? (free education, free health)

Why people want to live in a communist/socialist society where everyone is equal (socially and economically speaking) except for those in power?

I was borne and raised in a communist country and that is why I came here; and that is the reason I will not let my kid grow up in a socialist society ever!!!

Posted by: euro | June 16, 2008 11:37 AM

For all the comments here about young voters being impressionable and succumbing to peer pressure, there sure seem to be a whole lot of older voters trying to apply peer pressure to the young voters.

There's more news out there than any single organization could dream of reporting on, and enough views of a single subject to overwhelm a tenured politics professor. Younger voters get their news in a way that gives a much better cross section of all of this than older voters, who typically are attached to a single source of news. That's empowering.

Posted by: Kevin | June 16, 2008 11:32 AM

Sorry! I won't comment again because I'd like to hear other opinions.

Especially about this excerpt I took from PC magazine...

"In an interview with Politico.com recently, McCain admitted that is he not the most tech savvy candidate. When asked if he was a PC or a Mac supporter, McCain said, "Neither. I am an illiterate who has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance that I can get.""

NOW THAT'S SCARY...

Posted by: Grad student | June 16, 2008 11:32 AM

To suggest that younger voters are naive or confused because they don't agree with you is wishful thinking.

Posted by: Brittman1 | June 16, 2008 11:30 AM

Old people vote about as well as they drive...

Posted by: M Merritt | June 16, 2008 11:29 AM

Quick show of hands...

Which is more frightening to you, a young, well-educated, idealistic voter,

or a more experienced, less-educated, cynical voter?

Which would Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson prefer?

Posted by: grad student | June 16, 2008 11:28 AM

It is time to take the country away from those who have done so much to bring about it's decline.

I believe that Obama is the best candidate for president of the USA because his priorities actually make sense. Yes, we should talk to our enemies! Yes, why shouldn't my father have healthcare? Why do we continue to use broken economic systems when they clearly have been demonstrated to not work? The biggest reason to like Obama is that he has enough history to show that he can get things done, yet he hasn't been around so long that he's a major part of the problem we're in now, and thus has no reason to try to defend it to save face.

Also, to the people I've seen that say "College Students don't understand the value of work" Umm.. how many jobs do you have? I have 3, and that isn't uncommon. I work in two labs and a hospital to pay for college, and I do it during the school year as well. Don't tell me that college students don't understand the value of work and how taxes effect income, I see quite a bit of it.

When it comes down to it, the biggest point is that it's time for us to take a firm stand against fear mongering. Our whole culture is based around fear now, look at commercials even, all they have to sell you is the fear of living without their product. Our government has attempted to make us all so afraid since 9/11, and it's time to stand up like adults and show them that we're ready to be in a world were we're not afraid to deal with the consequences of our actions. We Are Not Afraid!

Posted by: Incarnal | June 16, 2008 11:28 AM

talking about troop withdrawal katie but thanks for your concern

unless you are loaded obama is not raising your taxes:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm

Posted by: euro sucks | June 16, 2008 11:25 AM

Youths are born with internet and they know how to use it effectively as a tool to help Obamas campaign.

To maintain operational links between the Obama headquarter, and the operational networks and target audiences. Websites and surfer forums provide convenient platforms for transmitting operative instructions to individuals - for example, posting bulletins calling for action, such as appearance at a caucus or to discredit other candidates from "mouth to mouth".

Collecting donations. To increase the amount of funds collected through the Internet for the Obama campaign.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:25 AM

It's fair enough to say that a young person is inexperienced. The words does mean, after all, to have little or no experience in a particular thing (such as voting), which a young person obviously would not have -- so why are we arguing about this...?

I would hesitate to accuse a young person of incompetence, as many are willing to look at issues in a new way, whereas their parents may be more regimented and addicted to party loyalty -- not even remembering that the issues their party ran on are opposite to what their party is now delivering. And yet the older voters seem to remain loyal no matter what their party does....

One thing about the inexperience of the young though: My son, who will be voting for the first time in November, thought he was a pretty left-wing liberal. Knowing my son, this seemed surprising, so I had him take the Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html. He learned he was a centrist, and almost a libertarian.

So young people can easily confuse agreement with a few issues with acceptance of an entire political paradigm, something that is corrected with experience.

Posted by: Carol | June 16, 2008 11:22 AM

Incidentally, does anyone else have a hard time taking an argument condemning people seriously when it's full of typos? Call me a grammar nazi, but I take your argument with a grain of salt when you can't spell it.

Also: euro sucks, I do think raising taxes for those reasons is a good idea. I see paying for education and preventive health care as a good government investment.

Posted by: katie | June 16, 2008 11:22 AM

None of the Above 08 wrote:

"Silencing the opposing viewpoint for pure majority rule is NOT what this country stands for."
_____________________________
Where have you BEEN for the past 8 years???

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:21 AM

I started my election research in mid-2006. I looked at EVERY candidate's resume, voting record, and platform. I utilized all forms of media, including the internet, where I double-checked all the sources that I could. When I tell people that I'm a grad student for Obama, they (including my family) all assume that I've "drunk the kool-aid". My mother, bless her!, occasionally makes the same accusation, even though she gets all her news from FNC and can barely use a computer.

There are two points I'd like to make:

1) it almost seems that older (sorry!) people have a hard time casting their first ballot for someone younger than they are,

2) It also seems that older voters harbor much more fear. This includes apprehension in voting for a previously-underrepresented type of candidate, fear of the internet and technology, fear of terrorism, and fear of change in any form.

Posted by: grad student | June 16, 2008 11:20 AM

We, those under 30, are taking this country back. We want our troops home. We want health care like Canada currently has (eventually). We want a president that engages oppressive regimes and shies them away from, essentially, communism and unilaterism. We want to show that, although we screwed up by invading Iraq and dragging tons of other countries with us, we want to repair relations with the rest of the world. We want a president that makes advancing renewable energies a top priority and doesn't just pay lip service to voters. We see light at the end of the tunnel, and we will fight to make it there.

*******************************************
I think this vastly oversimplifies the differences of opinion that exist among those under 30.

Additionally, I am troubled by the tone of this post: We want, we want, we want, with no regards to what others might have to say about it. You want? Go and get it for yourself.

This is the tone of big government. High taxes. Socialism. Is that what Americans want? I was born and raised in the US and I vehemently abhor all 3, as do many other of my fellow citizens. What of us? Do we get steamrolled? Thrown under the bus? Ignored? Told to sit down and shut up? I have heard all of the above and worse during this election season. Silencing the opposing viewpoint for pure majority rule is NOT what this country stands for.

Remember these words: "Ask not what your country can do for you..."? Spoken by a REAL American.

Posted by: None of the Above 08 | June 16, 2008 11:18 AM

Dear Aspergirl and all others who think that being under thirty means that you lack the ability to think critically:

I don't entirely blame you for thinking this. After all, it's one of McCain's campaign points in the form of abstinece only sex-education: the young must be kept ignorant, because the more we know, the more likely we are to disagree with you.

The point I do think you are missing here is that hope, and idealism, are choices. Younger people tend to make these choices: witness the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, a great many of whom were under the age of forty five.

You might as well say that older Americans shouldn't be voters, supporting your argument with such cliches as: they vote their fears rather than their hopes. They have let themselves become too practical. They have been worn down until they can only care about the practical, and not the moral. They are afraid of change and therefore vote in the way they think will make the world most like the place they thought it was or want it to be.

The young voters I know--my friends, my peers, my younger relatives--are invariably more informed about the election than the older voters I have spoken with. Perhaps this is one place youth works for us: we have not been through so many elections that this seems commonplace to us. We have not lost so much that our votes feel futile, that we feel that nasty messages on internet message boards are our only recourse. We have not given up yet. This is not a failing.

Posted by: henx | June 16, 2008 11:17 AM

Gee, I wonder who will win these voters: the hundred-year-old fossil who admits he can't use a computer (!!!!!) or the young man who uses a computer daily. The campaign team who allowed their merchandise site to be flooded with artificial comments or the campaign team who's made history by the amount of online donations they've received.

Hmmmmmmmmm....

Posted by: Chris | June 16, 2008 11:15 AM

euro:

"Change" is talking about fear, lies and calculated division that has predominated our political system.

The "Church" is a non-issue. It has no place in sensible politics. That's why people aren't caring about it. Even Obama, in a speech given well before his candidacy, expressed the need to leave religion at the door when creating policies for everyone. Everyone does not hold the same religious beliefs, so the only way to legislate "for all" is to remove it from legislation process. I agree.

How would you suggest we pay off the massive amounts of debt the country just assumed? TAX CUTS?

...we already have a free education system...


Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 11:15 AM

What I find most disturbing of all is comments like the one that started this thread, about who should be allowed to vote and who should not. When this country started out, you had to be a white male landowner to vote. Gradually, the landowner requirement was dropped, then the vote was opened up to all races, and finally to women.

At this point, everyone over 18 is allowed, and you, sir, don't get to dictate that only the people who agree with you ideologically are entitled to the privilege. That's totalitarianism.

If you took a moment to step back and look at your own words, you'd realize how incredibly anti-American and anti-democracy they are. And since those who share your ideology have been the dominant political party for the past 8 years and then some, much of our leadership is also similarly anti-American and anti-democracy.

The imperial presidency has to go. The "unitary executive" has to go. Extraordinary rendition has to go. Warrantless wiretapping has to go.
The military-industrial complex has to go.
The oil/gas/coal energy monopoly has to go.
Refusing a helping hand to those in poverty, while extending billions in corporate welfare has to go.

We need to start acting like our professed ideals have actual meaning, and stop acting like a bunch of petty dictators who run the world through military supremacy. In case you haven't noticed, those days are over. If America does not become a citizen of the world, we will be left behind it. And that's why the dinosaurs who have been running the GOP need to finally go extinct - it's time to evolve and grow.

Posted by: mike | June 16, 2008 11:13 AM

isn't it a good thing if he does?

Posted by: euro sucks | June 16, 2008 11:13 AM

Hey, euro: politics is a joke. It's not limited to D or R, it's all a power play across the spectrum. As for your horror of free education and health care, how is the United States supposed to be a world leader without educated, healthy people? Or do you expect that maybe slightly increased take home pay you'd get under McCain the alternative to cover those? It looks like he's willing to raise taxes, too. There's really very little difference between them.

Posted by: katie | June 16, 2008 11:12 AM

Can someone pls. explain what change Obama is about to bring and who's gonna benefit from Obamania?

The only chnange I can see, God forbid, is less take home pay as Nobama wants to establish free education, free health care, etc.

The whole Obamania is a joke and all he wants is juvenile votes so his wife can be proud for the first time in her adult life...gimme a break!

And the whold thing that young voters are more informed just because they spend more time on-line (researching) is a bunch of BS.

One can criticize GOP for Dubya all day long, but if Obama is the best Democrats have to offer, than it is a very very sad day for Dems...
If Obama is a man of strong convictions how in the world he could have left his church after media reveiled what his church is all about.
Is he going to order our troops to leave Iraq, Afganistan, and Europe if New York Times demands so???

Posted by: euro | June 16, 2008 11:04 AM

Some of you say young people are not smart enough to know and understand the issues, therefore they should not be allowed to vote.
Ask yourselves, should they be allowed to go and fight for their country or not? As a matter of fact, the youth has been silent that is why this country is where it is. Their fathers that seem to know everything voted for George Bush twice.

Posted by: Abe | June 16, 2008 11:04 AM

Some of you say young people are not smart enough to know and understand the issues, therefore they should not be allowed to vote.
Ask yourselves, should they be allowed to go and fight for their country or not? As a matter of fact, the youth has been silent that is why this country is where it is. Their fathers that seem to know everything voted for George Bush twice.

Posted by: Abe | June 16, 2008 11:04 AM

"The problem with young people...", "inexperienced", "incompetent." These are not the reasoned words of our rational parents. These are not the instructive words of our thoughtful teachers. These are not even the contestable words of our fiercest opponents. No, this is unfalsifiable invective, aimed at an entire generation of voters who have decided for the first time that we have a candidate who matches our values, our temperament, and, yes, our policy preferences. I wish writers who condescend to our generation understood that their barbs only strengthen Obama's candidacy and prove his central thesis-- political discourse has become poisoned. When we can't hear each other over our own shouts... when we can't 'disagree without being disagreeable', when we demean each other's opinion just because it is different from our own (I'm talking to you, AsperGirl), then we have lost the essence of what it means to be a citizen of this country.

My generation is one of the most educated in history. Yes, we indulge in fatuous pursuits and yes, it may seem to older generations that we spend most of our time on reality shows. But that is not the case. We are engaged in this election because politics finally matters to us. We spend our time promoting Obama not because of an empty message of "hope" and "change", but because those words are Code to my generation. They say, "I am a different candidate. Come see why." I was a Hillary supporter and a Richardson supporter before I pledged to Barack. He didn't win me (or my generation) because he's a smooth talker. He won me because he's right on the war, he's right on energy policy, and he's right on what kind of American image we should project to the world. That matters. My generation knows that.

So please. Argue that our positions are wrong. Argue that supply-side stimuli are better than government investment. But please don't insult the intelligence of young people, and please don't degrade us for the well-informed choice we have made.

Posted by: Eric | June 16, 2008 10:58 AM

Posted by: Jim

I think those young voters who are incompetent enough to fall for the "change" slogan without substance should not be allowed to vote. You may dislike the current administration, but guess what: we have yet to have another attack on our soil. Put Obama or Kerry in that situation, and we would be saying a pledge of allegiance to Allah. (Maybe we still will if Obama wins.)
----------------

Jim, your own incompetence shows through.

Neither Kerry nor Obama are Muslim, neither ran or is running on a religious platform, and neither would alone wield the power to change the Pledge of Allegiance.

There is no proof that anything this administration has done has prevented terrorist threats other than the "threats" of timely domestic flight check-in, toothpaste and racial profiling. The only thing we are certain of is that this administration was informed of the signs of the attack on 9/11, and chose to ignore it.

And I'm not just pissed at the administration - I'm pissed at people like you who clearly were incompetent enough to vote for Bush - twice.

"Change" is referring to you, sir. People who use lies and fear mongering to support their cause is precisely what we are trying to overcome.

Posted by: Chris | June 16, 2008 10:57 AM

saying voters under 30 are inexperienced and uninformed is like saying voters over 60 are senile

Posted by: ATX | June 16, 2008 10:55 AM

Interesting set of comments, especially those who attempt to prove that younger voters are less knowledgeable or competent than older voters. What colossal arrogance!

There has never been a more informed generation of younger voters, largely thanks to the internet - but also because younger voters (like some of us older folks - I'm 65), are sick and tired of the way so many of us older folks have fallen for the endless hype of the powers who want to stay in power.

Face it: It is the older generation of voters that is most to blame for the crappy state of our country. We elected Bush and Cheney, after all.

Now we have a chance to make things better.

Hallelujah for the younger voter!

Posted by: Dennis Berry | June 16, 2008 10:51 AM

Worker_Bob: I agree.

Also, Obama was not my first choice, but since I live in a March primary state, my first choice (Richardson, because he has a breadth of experience and is not divisive like Clinton) had already dropped out. Therefore, among the remaining candidates, I'll choose Obama, because while I respect McCain's record and agree with him on many of his pet projects (hello, campaign finance reform) I agree with Obama more. Can you really say that's a stupid kid being shallow? I base my choices on the issues, thanks.

Posted by: katie | June 16, 2008 10:49 AM

@mdc
"the problem with a young voter is the same problem that occurs in all facets of their lives- peer pressure. for the same reasons that britney spears, the hills and other talentless/worthless things have become popular, thus does barry obama."

You seem to have young voters confused with 15-year old girls. As a Millennial myself, I can state with some certainty that voting is not the _cool_ thing to do ("Dude, I just cast a totally awesome ballot!"). If someone is responsible enough to register to vote and to show up on election day, you can be reasonably confident they're not doing so as part of some fraternity hazing shenanigan.

Posted by: Jim P | June 16, 2008 10:45 AM

Aspergirl wrote: "It's hard to read them or try to discuss with them because they have this coded lexicon of politics-speak. Some of their ideas are extremely sophisticated and some are laughably immature and shallow."

And your posting likewise lacks substance. Argue with a scalpel, not a broadsword! Substantiate your rhetoric with one instance of evidence, however anecdotal, and perhaps I'll give your hyperbole consideration. Go bloviate on your own page.

Posted by: Worker_Bob | June 16, 2008 10:39 AM

I am one of the under-30s (I'm 24) and I love the condescending tone from people older than Millenials. Sure, we don't have as much life experience, but neither did you twenty or thirty years ago, and the United States seems to have gotten to this point (relatively) unscathed. I am working to educate myself on the issues so that I can be an informed voter, and so are many of my peers.

I wish people would give my generation the credit it's due: it seems we've fundamentally changed the way campaigning is done, across the political spectrum. How did Obama, McCain, Clinton, Paul, and the others get their respective politically active youth fan clubs this time around? The internet. Baby boomers need to recognize that we're approaching a generational changeover of power and communication tools, accept it, and work with us. We all presumably have the goal of improving America, so let's go with this grassroots organizing seen in the Obama and Paul campaigns, and run with it. (And now, I'll get off my soapbox.)

Posted by: katie | June 16, 2008 10:39 AM

No, Obama has not "fooled" us with his change slogan trickery. In fact, when he won in Iowa, which is what has driven him to where he is now, he didn't even have this slogan. Some of us poured our heart into Iowa before the slogan even existed, before Obamania existed, before we saw a phenomenon occur. The Obama phenomenon is not completely because of him, but because of us that work in the background, because of us that will fight day and night to change the government the way we want it changed. We will continue our fight, regardless of whether or not Obama wins.

Posted by: DDB | June 16, 2008 10:38 AM

i also would like to add that votes should be weighted by the amount of tax one pays.

Posted by: mdc | June 16, 2008 10:38 AM

I think people who don't know enough about religion to know that Allah is the Arabic word for God -- and that the God of the Muslims is also the God of the Jews and the Christians -- shouldn't have the right to vote. But since they do, it's only fair that the "incompetent ... young voters" get their say in the process as well.

Posted by: Phoenix Blue | June 16, 2008 10:34 AM

the problem with a young voter is the same problem that occurs in all facets of their lives- peer pressure. for the same reasons that britney spears, the hills and other talentless/worthless things have become popular, thus does barry obama. these young voters have moldable minds, monkey see monkey do, and are freshly out of (or still in) the liberally biased education system. it's definitely not cool to be a republican. it wasn't when i was in school. i doubt it is now.

Posted by: mdc | June 16, 2008 10:34 AM

Charlie,

A quick question. You say college students must understand how taxes and issues impact their lives. Then you say, lots of college students now must live at home because it's too expensive to live on thier own, after graduation. Don't you answer your own statement? Isn't that an example of college students learning how taxes and issues impact their lives?

I have friends in Afghanistan, friends who live at home, friends already injured and on disability, and friends with banks making >$100k/yr. How do I not have familiarity with these issues?

(Since I do have a job, won't be back till the end of the day. If you do reply though, I'll read it.)

Posted by: Joe Vardner | June 16, 2008 10:31 AM

I think those young voters who are incompetent enough to fall for the "change" slogan without substance should not be allowed to vote. You may dislike the current administration, but guess what: we have yet to have another attack on our soil. Put Obama or Kerry in that situation, and we would be saying a pledge of allegiance to Allah. (Maybe we still will if Obama wins.)

Posted by: Jim | June 16, 2008 10:25 AM

Just because we are young does not make us stupid. Ignorance knows know age group, as can be seen by all who voted vociferously for Bush Jr. We see what is going on, we are sick of the do-nothing-lip service that has become of our country's leaders and we are completely sick of what has happened to our country. As a product of our generation, the internet is our tool and our playground. It only makes sense then we use it.

Posted by: ABlake | June 16, 2008 10:24 AM

It is great for young voters to be involved. However, it is not so great when they embrace ideas that do not impact them directly. The majority of college students that so blindly follow Obama have not be in the "real world of work" and see directly how taxes can make a good gross income be a pretty little net take-home amount for their family. Do not forget that many people entering the work force are forced to live with their folks since it is too expensive to live on their own. SO, in closing, before the young folks begin to embrace all kinds of ideas that involve raising taxes, they need to think how those increases will impact their lives.

Posted by: Charlie | June 16, 2008 10:21 AM

What they see is the hypocrisy of chicken-hawks, who praise the "greatest generation", having other priorities during the Vietnam War and leading us into a phony war. What they see is intolerance, bigotry and hate being sold to America by the corporate press for it's own interests.

Real Americans don't torture. Real Americans don't spy on each other. Real Americans don't accuse other Americans of Hating America when they ask reasonable questions about important issues. America is done with Republicans. Watch the Party wither and die.

Posted by: thebob.bob | June 16, 2008 10:16 AM

Want to know the power of youth voting, simply look at Oregon: busproject.org.

The Bus Project has become a large factor in only six years. They've massively increased youth voter turnout, helped narrow races, and are even getting more young people elected. Every major politician in Oregon attends several of their events a year, because they know the influence young people have in this state.

Fun thing is, isn't not a radical idea. Young people have the most to gain from being involved. And door-to-door campaigning is proven as the best way to increase voter turnout. We do it cause it works, we do it cause it's fun, and we do it we are the group of crazies: good people, doing good things, for no good reason.

Posted by: Joe Vardner | June 16, 2008 10:14 AM

The problem with the young people is that they have a strangely intelligent yet strangely clueless subculture. They develop words and political affectations that represent whole thought systems (misrepresent too simplistically, I should say). The simplistic representations make it easier for them to analyze large issues without a lot of factual knowledge, but they also are extremely naive and ignorant about whole swatches of ideas.

So they are strangely wise, but also strangely clueless. They have a lot of information but the only insights they seem to have are those that are established within the dialog of their subculture where their codewords and oversimplified paradigms allow them to share political theories and ideas without really understanding what they are talking about.

It's hard to read them or try to discuss with them because they have this coded lexicon of politics-speak. Some of their ideas are extremely sophisticated and some are laughably immature and shallow.

I suppose they're like teenagers & young activists anywhere.

As a voting block, they obviously bring a lot of energy and fresh imperatives and new thinking to the marketplace of ideas and voting power balance. These are all plusses. Especially when you get an impasse like a party with too much power due to a niche wedge issue (abortion, religion, anti-gay) that brings political progress to a halt. The power of a youth vote to break these dead old logjams is wonderful.

However, as a voting block, they also bring their naivete and group biases. For example, all the enchantment with Obama's rhetoric is totally without recognition that the people who say the prettiest things are often those who can't deliver. I.e. they haven't yet discovered that the ability to charm and communicate is usually disconnected from the ability to perform (especially in politics). So they seem to fall for every manipulation and affectation in the snake oil salesman's playbook.

They are the political equivalent of children -- wonderful and maddening.

Posted by: AsperGirl | June 16, 2008 10:13 AM

RR/FL, you should be criticizing the older voters who voted for George Bush (twice!) because they thought he would be a good guy to have a beer with. How about the ones who watched Fox News and therefore got their facts scrambled?
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php

I give the under-30's a lot more credit than that.

Posted by: Tom J | June 16, 2008 10:12 AM

The younger voters are much more engaged, and are much more apt to do their own independent research through a variety of sources. Older voters tend to believe what they see in political advertisements - and unfortunately mass email mailings.

Posted by: Julie | June 16, 2008 10:12 AM

It bugs me when I hear some people talking about about how older voters "know better" and are less naive than young people about choosing a candidate (most notably Bill Clinton in mid-April). From my experience, the exact opposite is often true - the choices of many older Americans can actually be clouded by prejudices they've acquired throughout life, preventing them from considering new promising alternatives. There are certainly plenty of young people who are selecting candidates for the wrong reasons, but I doubt that it's any more than from other age groups.

Posted by: Jim | June 16, 2008 10:12 AM

@ RR/FL
"And, because of their youth, most of them are inexperienced in evaluating the issues and tend to vote without a clear understanding of the consequences. Let's hope they take advantage of the many news sources available and make an informed decision in the general election."

I disagree. I think today's youth are far more informed than we were at that age. They have grown up with the internet, and they understand how to use it to discover what they want to know. I also think that a lot of the people who are decrying the "Obamania" are people who never really took a good look at the man to begin with. They never really bothered to actually look up the information that is available out there. Barack Obama isn't just empty promises and hope. He actually does have a valid platform. He's just so unlike the regular politicians that we're used to that I think a lot of people don't really understand him, especially those of us who are older and have become accustomed to business-as-usual in Washington.

Posted by: PapaBear | June 16, 2008 10:03 AM

The under-30 voters in my house are knowledgable and engaged, much savvier about the issues than anyone who gets their information from 24-hour talkbabble "news" programs. Those programs have been draining the public intellect for too long;I hope the commitment of young voters in this election will prove their irrelevance.

Posted by: EileenN | June 16, 2008 9:59 AM

Oh, the Young and Dumb;

Here they Come! :-/

People being involved in Politics that are not a real part of the society(Breadwinners), are supposed to have been elected!

They are called Congressmen and Representatives! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 16, 2008 9:57 AM

In response to DDB: I pray that you mean what you say -- that your actions will reflect your words, no matter what personal sacrifices you will have to make it happen. Take a look at the "Greatest Generation" -- how many today would be willing to do without for the sake of the greater good? Its a notion that has become foreign to us all. We are ALL (young/old) a reflection of what is happening in this country.

Posted by: pattiedesign | June 16, 2008 9:43 AM

While I applaud the youth involvement, I wish that more of these young voters would look at the overall, big picture. Too many of them see the candidates in a superficial way, young/old, black/white, etc. and follow the example of their peers. And, because of their youth, most of them are inexperienced in evaluating the issues and tend to vote without a clear understanding of the consequences. Let's hope they take advantage of the many news sources available and make an informed decision in the general election.

Posted by: RR/FL | June 16, 2008 9:31 AM

"one+side-ism"

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 9:31 AM

unilateralism*

Posted by: DDB | June 16, 2008 9:17 AM

Older people, poor people and disabled people have been disenfrachised regarding internet. The Obama Campaign has been learning from this:

"Beyond the battle for hearts and minds, the Internet has a variety of other uses :

A. Maintaining operational links between the organizations' headquarters, and the operational networks and target audiences , which are often widely separated by geography (for example, the Hamas political bureau in Damascus, headed by Khaled Mashaal, and the organization's networks in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip). Websites and surfer forums provide convenient platforms for transmitting operative instructions to individuals or to an entire audience (for example, posting bulletins calling for action, such as appearance at a demonstration.) 1 In addition, the Internet is also used to collect intelligence regarding terrorist attack targets. 2

B. Acquiring operational knowhow . Terrorist operatives use the Internet's technical sites which contain information about topics such as making explosives and constructing rockets. That is particularly important for the Palestinian terrorist organizations, which do not have standard advanced weapons such as those possessed by Hezbollah.

C. Collecting donations . In recent years there has been an increase in the amount of funds collected through the Internet for Islamic "charitable societies." The Islamic terrorist organizations, including Hezbollah and Hamas, use their vast networks of "charitable societies" to fund its civilian wing, although a portion of the money also leaks into funding terrorist activities."

.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 9:16 AM

Have they chosen their VP's yet?
Who do you think should be picked as VP running mate?
Votenic.com is running a weekly poll.
Check out their results and vote your choice.

http://www.votenic.com

Posted by: George | June 16, 2008 9:15 AM

We, those under 30, are taking this country back. We want our troops home. We want health care like Canada currently has (eventually). We want a president that engages oppressive regimes and shies them away from, essentially, communism and unilaterism. We want to show that, although we screwed up by invading Iraq and dragging tons of other countries with us, we want to repair relations with the rest of the world. We want a president that makes advancing renewable energies a top priority and doesn't just pay lip service to voters. We see light at the end of the tunnel, and we will fight to make it there.

Posted by: DDB | June 16, 2008 9:09 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company