I live in Canada and I can name a lot of the american candidates…
An election’s being called here on Nov. 27th, and I just cannot wait to vote. It’s the one thing I’ve been looking forward to for when I turn 18 (I could buy alcohol and whatever before, too). I am planning on taking it seriously, as I know most of my friends are. In some ways, I’d think the younger voters would be MORE interested in voting. Our first chance to make our voices count… defihitely something I’m looking forward to.
MTV.
Voting.
Voting.
MTV.
I seriously think the pairing of these two should end at TRL. Doesn’t anyone realize that the people they are trying to persuade into choosing our leaders are the same people who can’t decide between spending four hours online to put the Backstreet Boys or *N SYNC in the #1 spot?
I hear you on this one !!
As a Canadian, I am quite in tune with the American election … I wonder what % of the American public can name our Prime Minister (or note the fact that he is a PM), or even point at Canada on a map … grin
My current favorite quote from my college graduate friend: “Who’s Ralph Nader?” :rolleyes:
I think it’s kind of shitty to assume that because there are some stupid teenagers, then all of us are idiots. I have been registered to vote since I turned 18 (I’m 19 now) and I could debate the issues as well as any 35 year old, perhaps even better. In fact, you might be interested to know that this morning on the smoking terrace at work, about 7 of us (all around the age of 20) got into a political debate. There were 3 guys, aged around 30, who just sat there, and one woman, I’d say 40, who kept quiet too.
I also think that it’s narrow-minded to think MTV is not helping younger kids with politics. Although I never watch MTV anymore, I used to regularly (pre-TRL, thankyouverymuch) and watching the “Rock the Vote” coverage was what really influenced me to become a part of this election. Maybe they are fluffy and silly, but it is a voice teenagers will listen to, much more so than CNN.
Also…
How many did they ask, I wonder? One hundred? Because from personal experiance, I’d say these statistics are bullshit.
And…
I have a better idea. Why don’t we give everyone an IQ test at the age of 12. If they score under a hundred, they get branded with “STUPID” across their forehead.
That sure would help a lot. At least I wouldn’t have to listen to ridiculous ideas like this one.
Kids will get out to vote when each and every one of them (say between 18 and 30) is willing to pay $9 per year to establish an organization to lobby for them, affect legislation and inform them about the issues via direct mail. Oldsters have AARP that does specifically that for them and allows the additional benefits of cheaper hotel rooms and buffet dinners to boot.
It seems to me that it is precisely that 18 to 30 demographic that advertisers wish to attract because of its huge disposable income. Why can’t that same demographic develop a non-partisan lobbying and information arm of its own?
I suspect the reason is simple: no one in government really wants larger numbers of younger people voting, because issues such as job training, education and better day care for young workers would require huge funding increases that older, wealthy, enfranchised people are unwilling to pay for. The pie will only feed so many: as it is currently constituted, it can feed the elderly (because they demand it), but not youth (because they’d rather be skating).
Actually, it’s not “Scary” at all, because the numbers don’t mean anything. A “poll” that isn’t random and was probably self-selected to some extent is absolutely meaningless; they may as well be randomly selected.
Actually, it is since obviously they asked someone these questions, and they couldn’t answer. That the poll was random has nothing to do with the fact that even with the extensive coverage of the campaigns, some morons out there can’t even be bothered to know the names of the candidates. And we aren’t talking about the obscure ones, like Natural Law, or Socialist! How many of you have been able to turn on the tv and NOT see Gore’s or Bush’s faces??
Does it even matter??! The fact is THEY COULDN"T ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION! Even one person not knowing at least one candidate is a pretty sad state of affairs.
Yeah, I attacked “kids.” And of course I meant every single 18-24 yr old alive. Nacho, I don’t know what numbers you have “personally experienced” but the idea that young people are uninformed and do not vote is not one first introduced by MTV. It’s a fairly well documented trend. Why do you think Rock the Vote and now the NAACP’s Get Your Vote On came to be?
what makes you suspect it was out of ignorance? Now who is jumping to conclusions?
You know… ** shut the fuck up. **
I don’t care what you meant, but you opened a thread that at least flirted with telling me that my entire age group is uninformed and unintelligent.
Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you.
I don’t think I even have my own issues to be spoken to, but maybe that’s just me.
This is M-fucking-TV. They probably polled four people, and the one who couldn’t answer was either drunk, stoned, both, or just didn’t want to talk to them. As like as not 25% of teens don’t want to talk to MTV, and will ingore their asinine polls. Now quitcherwhining and go find yourself a two by four to get hit with.
[sub] I’m in awfully combattive modd tonight, hmmm… [/sub]
I have only voted once, and the person I voted for did not get in.
I personally don’t believe my vote counts at all, and anyway, all politicians, in my experience, are exactly the same - unqualified greedy petty ineffectual schmoozers.
I am proud to be indifferent!
Oh hell, call me an optimist . . .but I tend to think those blocks of N*Street voters are more in the 10 - 15 year old female category. Which is to say, of the non-voting variety. Although I do agree that the idea of those mindless dolts having a say in the next leader of the free world is quite frightening.
Sure there is a good bit of voter apathy among my age group. I chalk it up to the fact that choosing between Bush and Gore appears on many levels to be similiar to the huge oatmeal or cream of wheat debate. More than that, I think it’s a vicious cycle. The politicians don’t attempt to discuss issues relevant to the younger generation because they believe it is time wasted on a group who will not vote. The young people are not excited about the election because the candidates are not speaking to them. Which came first . . . the chicken or the egg ?
Yep, I am voting.
If I can’t hunt rabbits with a AK-47, my freakin’ Constitutional rights have been violated !!!
not that it’s relevant, but it’s my age group as well.
Are you denying that our age group is notorious for being uninformed and apathetic?
So vote independent. There are at least 5 other parties with candidates running for office- one of which is bound to be on your ballot. At least then the youth vote numbers increase and we look like we care.
It is really much easier to sluff the whole thing off. Don’t worry about the candidates or what position they have on any issues. Party hardy and wake up one day wondering how things came to be in the state they are in. Don’t apply this to any one age group because every age group in the USA is guilty of this idiotic behavior. What’s really great is those who bitch and moan the most never vote because they think it is wasted. We are a nation of lazy morons for having this kind of attitude. How can we look other countries in the eye, telling them about free election of government when we have such a low voter turnout. Some day the phrase use it or lose it will have a meaning everyone will finally understand.
Well, I don’t want to respond…I tend not to when the person I am repsonding to pats everyone who agrees on the back and attacks the one who happens to have a different thought, but hey:
I just observed. You know, like the dumbass poll you quoted - I asked some political questions and the only ones who got involved were the younger ones. If you scan back to my post, you will quickly realize that I never concluded anything, just pointed out what happened. Since this evidence flies in the face of what you concluded, I thought it might be relevent.
So, I guess YOU jumped the ball on that one, huh? You have a little pie on your face right there - yup, you got it.
Well, you did say:
and
What stupid fucking kids? All the 18-24 year olds you mentioned in the first quote?
Are you attempting to draw a line between people who are 21 and “kids” and those who are “adults”? Because it’s very fuzzy.
I’m glad you’re busy bitching about it. Way to make a change. I campaigned for a local senator before I was old enough to vote, along with about 15 other kids my age. I also served as a page to the Senate my senior year in high school and sat through all the meetings in Annapolis while living there for two weeks. I attended a volunteer summit in DC and met Bill Clinton. All of these included many other people my age who were very interested in politics. That is my “personal experiance” and it therefore rings more true than the poll you addressed.
All the people my age (your age too) who have replied to your OP have basically said that this poll is not necessarily representative of reality. What more do you want?
I gotta ask this.
Have any of you ever been asked a question or questions by a person you did not know? Any of you get a sudden yen to fuck with head of some busybody? You know, give wrong answers, wrong directions, yank their chain? I know I did, in my increaingly distant youth.
Hey, I’m sure some of the kids couldn’t name the canidates. But I’ve seen Leno ask people (adults) if they could name the capital of their home state, or find it on a map, and blow it.
But part of me thinks some of these kids were having a bit of fun with the questioner to skew the results a little.
Which, as always, brings me back to the inescapeable position that polls don’t mean shit! We don’t know:
Why should we believe any poll?
Well, I apologize if I read into it something that was not there. It seemed that you were championing the intelligence of the younger people over the older people.
The “stupid fucking kids” who couldn’t answer the pollster. Yes, polls are suspect. Yes, polls should not be assumed to speak for the entire population (or the segment represented). I did not say that this poll meant that every “kid” (18-24, by popular opinion) was a moron. I expressed dismay that anyone could get away with not knowing a single candidate. My ire was directed at “kids” because this age group tends to complain that the candidates ignore them.
Incidentally, the poll was a joint effort between CBS and MTV. They polled a “nationally representative sample” of 600+ people.
And spooje, no, I don’t think that these kids would get a kick out of looking dumb. Maybe that’s just me.
pretty cheap shot, don’t you think? Why are you assuming that I am uninvolved? Why do you assume that I haven’t done the same or more of the things you have done? Is it unheard of for a person who is trying to make a change to get frustrated?
That’s great! I agree, your experience doesn’t sound like you were surrounded by apathetic youth. But do you really think this is the norm? If it is, then why do you think youth apathy has become a focus the past few years?
Let me reiterate, I did not say that I felt this poll represented all youth. However, I think denying the trend that 18-24s don’t vote because people we know do vote is pretty ridiculous. And the sentiment that 18-24s don’t vote because the candidates don’t speak to them is a weak reason. I think the personal experiences of a few people shouldn’t be taken as gospel- just a poll shouldn’t either. OKAY? Can I stop fielding comments about how I think all 18-24s are morons? The horse is dead folks. Let’s move on.
…Although I would have kicked Nixon in the nuts. Just kidding, violence is bad, m’kay.
I took Senior Government in high school a few years before the amendment enfranchising 18-year-olds went into effect. The teacher lambasted–by name–at least one of his own students in another period, as becoming eligible to vote at 21, according to the law at the time.
He also said that people should not have the right to vote unless they can pass an examination on government and politics, and own real estate.
I told this to my mother and she spat back, “Yeah–and have both eyes on the same side of the nose!” (I still wonder whether I should have quoted her to him; I never did so.)
It doesn’t matter if the “dumb-ass” respondents of deserve the vote or not. If they can’t name the candidates or their running mates, odds are that they weren’t planning to vote anyway.
I personally don’t feel we need standardized testing for voting. People who don’t care to pay attention, don’t care to vote either. They sort themselves out.
I just gotta say a hearty fuck you to the teacher who thought that only landowners should be allowed to vote. Thanks to college loans I can’t seriously consider buying a home until I’m 30. Besides, in today’s economy, renting can sometimes be more economic than buying because of high land prices, cost of building upkeep, and insurance. Owning land is not a good indicator of voting intelligence, IMHO.
Quote…
“I wish you had to pass some sort of general knowledge test before you could vote.”
Standardized tests!
That’s the answer to everything.
Yup.
That way everyone who can afford to acquire the knowledge tested by them will get to vote and everyone who can’t…won’t!
Fantastic.
While we’re doing this, let’s go into Miami or the Bronx and poll some of the immigrant neighborhoods. When they don’t answer the poll to our liking we can challenge their voting rights with a test as well.
<coughcoughjimcrowlawscoughcough>
This is eerie and idiotic.
If you recognize that polling 600 people on a national issue doesn’t mean shit, then why the hell did you open this thread???
I don’t care if CBS (sidenote: aren’t they notoriously known as the “geriatric tv network”) collaborated with MTV. That doesn’t add validity to the study. You don’t know the manner in which they phrased the questions. Did they ask “Who is running for president?” or was it more along the lines of “Who is on the GOP ticket?” Some people might readily answer the first question, but hesitate on the second one as they aren’t completely sure what GOP or ticket mean.