“This voting bloc can no longer be an afterthought for any party or campaign”
Unlike other groups, young voters gave Obama an edge on handling the economy. Beyond that, their attitudes on social issues align much more closely with those of Obama and Democrats. For instance, a poll commissioned by the Harvard Institute of Politics showed that young voters preferred Obama over Romney on immigration reform (50 percent to 30 percent), health care policy (54 percent to 35 percent), and issues important to women (58 percent to 27 percent). A 2011 Pew Research Center poll last year found that 59 percent of Americans aged 18 to 30 support legalizing gay marriage…
“I thought the turnout would be low because I didn’t think the campaigns and the political system were treating young people particularly well. There wasn’t a particularly coherent debate going on about policy, and honestly, there was a lot of mudslinging,” said Peter Levine, director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. “So then you have to go to the explanation that this is coming from them … that they were not enthusiastic or happy about the campaign, but they were persistent.”…
As Matt Segal, president of the youth-advocacy group Our Time, pointed out, it’s no coincidence that when youth turnout was high, ballot initiatives to validate same-sex marriage passed in four states.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Young voters will be thrilled with their decisions when they get older.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 3:33 PM
The youth of America are stupid. I think what should happen to them is what happened to a good portion of the student body in the movie “Disturbing Behavior”.
UODuckMan on November 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM
So they voted for Obama. In Romney they had a fiscally conservative, socially moderate/liberal candidate, yet they chose the full-on Democrat. So much for the arrogant centrists who think that by abandoning social conservatism they’d win. In Romney they got what they wanted, and they still lost to the all-around liberal.
It sounds less like the GOP needs to change positions, and more like it needs to engage in persuasion.
Or they can just all become Democrats.
Stoic Patriot on November 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM
Historically, most of he time, they never acknowledge it. Look at Argentina.
It will be “Blame Bush” and “Blame The 1%” in perpetuity.
WeekendAtBernankes on November 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM
Didn’t I just see something on Hot Air like yesterday saying that Romney won the white under 30 demo?
vegconservative on November 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM
Hahahahahahaha … young people voted to allow illegals to take their jobs.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 3:38 PM
Romney won white young voters by 7 points.
Obviously, acknowledging that would be racist, and worse, would destroy a good story.
HitNRun on November 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Forget the “Obama won; Romney lost” meme.
There was no election: http://obamavoterfraud.blogspot.com/
davidk on November 10, 2012 at 3:45 PM
Yes, but they only voted that way due to racism. For the non whites their vote was based on doing what is right for America.
Kataklysmic on November 10, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Won whites under 30, got absolutely clobbered by others… there was about 2 million new Latino voters, many of them were probably under 30, so a lot of overlap there.
El_Terrible on November 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Really? Those who are the least in touch with the economy thought Obummer did a stellar job? How surprising!
Valkyriepundit on November 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Ron Paul 2016!
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Ron Paul 2016!
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Too old and ::cough:: blanco ::cough::
El_Terrible on November 10, 2012 at 3:49 PM
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 3:52 PM
Paul/walker 2016. Yes, lowercase.
lester on November 10, 2012 at 3:55 PM
Socially moderate/liberal? Are you serious? Besides, it’s not just social policy that determines this allegiance. Just like with hispanics, the youth at its core supports a more generous safety net, more aggressive government intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation.
ernesto on November 10, 2012 at 3:55 PM
I thought this was going to be about the TEA Party…heh.
d1carter on November 10, 2012 at 4:00 PM
From the guy who said that he would sustain and support Roe v Wade as governor? You bet I’m willing to say that Romney was socially liberal in that regard. Romney also told the Des Moines register he would do nothing about abortion. His sister told voters he wouldn’t overturn Roe. He said Chick-fil-A voters were not a part of his campaign. In so far as he talked about abortion, he stressed that he favored legal abortion in the event of rape, incest, or life of the mother, rather than make a moral case against the 98% of abortions that are elective. When asked about Benghazi in the 3rd debate, he said he wanted to spend foreign aid money on promoting gender equality in the Middle East.
Does that sound like the rhetoric of a social conservative to you?
Stoic Patriot on November 10, 2012 at 4:03 PM
Yeah, but “the youth” have no idea that it costs money, and progressive taxation kills opportunity and business … and everytime the government intrudes into the private market it screws it up.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 4:05 PM
You conveniently avoided the question of gays, or drugs, which are a huge part of the social policy discussion in this country. And to be honest, the youth care less about abortion than they do gay rights, gender equality, or drug law. You’re just wrong in characterizing Romney as a social moderate or liberal, and wrong in your conclusion regardless because the youth vote is tied to social welfare, healthcare, education, and progressive taxation.
ernesto on November 10, 2012 at 4:06 PM
It’s that absolutism that is keeping the GOP from making inroads with the growing populations of this country. There are many exceptions to everything you’ve said, but you’ll only vote for candidates that refuse to accept them. But please, continue. Lose nationally, forever.
ernesto on November 10, 2012 at 4:08 PM
However, I say give the youth what they want. Raise taxes as high as you want. Develops safety nets out the ass, and develop government agencies that oversee every aspect of business. A few hundred thousand bureaucrats should do the trick.
I’m all for giving liberals everything their little hearts desire … everything. Kill oil, gas and coal too.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 4:09 PM
And on gays, Romney was the first governor in the country to legalize gay marriage. He ran to Ted Kennedy’s left on the issue of homosexuality. He’s said almost nothing about drugs. He’s a social liberal.
Stoic Patriot on November 10, 2012 at 4:13 PM
9/11 truthers are morally and intellectually unfit for office.
Alberta_Patriot on November 10, 2012 at 4:13 PM
Anything that can be rolled back should be surrendered immediately. The only delay should be making sure that Obama gets exactly what he wants, and in notifying the public in advance to build awareness of his triumph.
HitNRun on November 10, 2012 at 4:13 PM
Asolutism? I told the truth. Everything costs money … lots of it and the little darlings have no clue that it does. What you nuts conveniently forget to tell the little tykes is that everytime you increase the cost of doing business by raising taxes or increased regulation, business passes that cost onto the consumer … namely the middle class and low income. Democrats know that, they want that. AS life becomes more expensive because of actions by democrats they blame it all on evil business and Republicans and demnand even higher taxes and more regulation until they control everything.
Get real. Take your fantasy of utopia and stick it far up your lower body cavity.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 4:14 PM
Really? When does government ever improve an industry except through its ability to pour an endless amount of money down the drain, ala green energy companies?
Young white voters care about those social issues too, yet they swung for Romney, Keep pretending it’s not about race. Young black and latino voters were against Romney because he was white and Mormon, not because of his policies wrt gay marriage and cannabis.
Good Solid B-Plus on November 10, 2012 at 4:15 PM
But I partially agree with ernesto. We should be embracing the young, libertarian wing of the party. We should be winning the white millenial vote 60-40 given the enthusiasm for Ron Paul on college campuses, not by the narrow margin Romney won it.
Don’t even bother trying to pander to young latino and black voters; all the Dems have to do is run Cory Booker and there goes 75% of that bloc in an instant.
Good Solid B-Plus on November 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM
I don’t want to pander to anyone. I want liberals to get everything their little hearts desire. I want the House to give Obama everything he wants. Everything
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 4:19 PM
Romney should have dispatched Ryan to college campuses giving economic lessons to college kids.
Not talking points, but explanations about debt and deficits in their future if nothing is down very soon.
As it turned out, Ryan seemed to disappear after the convention.
BuckeyeSam on November 10, 2012 at 4:20 PM
Romney won the “youth” vote that is actually swingable… “white youths”…
cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls
cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
Vote by Age and Race
White 18-29 (11%)[same in both polls]
Obama: 54% – MCain: 44%
Obama: 44% – Romney: 51%
It makes no sense whatsoever to talk about the “youth vote”… we’re all “back to blood” in the Tom Wolfe sense now… race is everything.
ninjapirate on November 10, 2012 at 4:26 PM
It makes no sense to talk about “youth” voters anymore… we’re all racialized now… Romney won the white youth vote.
ninjapirate on November 10, 2012 at 4:28 PM
What does the lowercase “walker” mean? Scott Walker? I’ve been a Walker fan in the past as recorded here at HotAir but he is too closely associated with Romney and the NE RINO Republicans now, the zombie Bush/Romney machine, and I’m very suspicious of him. He and a lot of other’s, including Rand Paul, are on probation as far as I’m concerned. I wasn’t kidding in past months when I said that Romney is literally a dishonest cheat who rigged votes at the RNC. I wasn’t lying when I said that a bunch of old white male Republicans were literally cheating and disenfranchising young, racially diverse Ron Paul supporters in the caucuses, and based on all the cheating probably rigged the primary votes against him as well.
If Ron Paul had been the Republican Nominee and hadn’t been maliciously smeared by right wing media during the campaign but had been supported instead, he would have won the NE easily and defeated Obama in a landslide. This is not pie in the sky, polls showed during the primary process that Ron Paul appealed to the biggest tent of American voters, including the youth and minorities. So since Ron Paul would win the NE anyway he it would be better for him to pick a VP that Rush Limbaugh and traditional small-gov Republican voters would approve of, IMO.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 4:28 PM
I don’t. I’m young enough to still want to save this country, to the extent that it can be saved. That means winning big in 2014 and 2016, and that means winning big with the white youth vote.
Good Solid B-Plus on November 10, 2012 at 4:29 PM
Like it or not, Ron Paul tapped into youth voters. Ron Paul was the wrong standard-bearer, but his consistent 8-10% support in the primaries shows you that his message resonated with some. Its a place to start.
Revenant on November 10, 2012 at 4:29 PM
Can’t save it until people feel the full force of “liberalism”. It won’t be saved … it will be rebuilt.
darwin on November 10, 2012 at 4:34 PM
The way to win the NE states that voted Obama is with liberty, not tyranny. Statism isn’t the solution, it’s the problem. People didn’t vote for Obama/Romney because they don’t want more authoritarian statism, they want less.
That’s why the crooks that control our political system cheated Ron Paul and gave us Romney instead, because if Ron Paul had won the nomination, an he would have in a fair race, he would have defeated Obama and all the cronies would lose everything. Many of them would have to leave the county on the run or end up in prison, IMO. So they cheated. It cost them a couple billion dollars but their corruption is worth trillions. A few billion dollars is nothing to them. Next time in ’16 they’ll probably rig the game for Jeb Bush and spend a hundred billion dollars—and I’m still going to vote for Ron Paul or another genuine freedom/liberty candidate, I don’t care if the crooks spend a trillion dollars, and they might because they control the printing presses.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 4:40 PM
Thank you for you open-minded comment but I disagree that Ron Paul is the wrong standard bearer. In fact Scott Rasmussen had Ron Paul tied with Romney in electability against Obama during the primary, in multiple polls, and that was in spite of all the malicious smears being spread by Rush, Levin and FNC. If a few of the variables against Ron Paul had gone the other way, if Rush hadn’t smeared him at a crucial time without giving his audience the full story, then Ron Paul would have won the nomination, IMO, and if so he certainly would have defeated Obama.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 4:54 PM
Lord of the Flies
portlandon on November 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM
I don’t. Then again, I’m one of those white voters under 30 that Obama and the Democrats lost with their rhetoric and economic mismanagement. George W. Bush lost me too, mind you, but I don’t think I could vote for a Democrat now under any circumstances unless, of course, that Democrat was Walter Russell Meade <3.
Punchenko on November 10, 2012 at 5:05 PM
Not all of them. Ron Paul has the youth vote and doesn’t support any of those things.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM
Hang in there. Obamacare is coming, and soon you’ll be able to get the mental help you so desperately need.
Have you decided which nursing home he should use as his campaign headquarters for 2016 yet?
xblade on November 10, 2012 at 5:11 PM
It’s because of scumbags like you that Romney lost to the worst president in American history.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM
Ron Paul has squat.
Ron Paul lost his home district to Romney, 3-1. Ron Paul couldn’t break 12% in his home state.
Ron Paul is the answer to none of the questions this country has.
Rebar on November 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM
Amen. Limiting government is “absolutism” so bring on the authoritarian command economy. Expand every single government agency and raise taxes to 90% on everyone. I’m dead serious. Give the liberals everything they want.
Django on November 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM
So, a guy who couldn’t even beat republicans because he was smeared by Limbaugh would have no problem defeating Obama after he was smeared by every media organization in the country, lol. Sure, I’m buying that. Hey, it probably would have been a landslide too. Americans love voting for old white guys who put out racist newsletters.
Like I’ve said all week folks, the crazy vote is now in the majority, and it isn’t limited to the left.
xblade on November 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM
So, young voters crave liberty so much, they voted once again for possibly the most anti-liberty candidate this country has ever known. Makes perfect sense…if you’re an idiot.
Meanwhile, Obama ran AGAINST gay marriage in the first election, and young voters STILL flocked to him. Go figure.
xblade on November 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM
Hear!..Hear!..
Dire Straits on November 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM
Only a statist would say that.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM
Yes, I’m saying that if Rush and others had defended Ron Paul against the lefts malicious, disprovable smears, Ron Paul would have won the nomination and the presidency.
Not because he’s the slickest candidate or the best liar, but because he truly does have the answers to Americas biggest problems.
FloatingRock on November 10, 2012 at 5:26 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »