One thing the Kerry campaign was really counting on was a turnout surge among voters aged 18-30 – but, according to most news reports, it didn’t happen. About 20 million voters 18-30 voted – up by 4.5 million from 2000 (http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpjay094035359nov09,0,3248026.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines – but that’s still less than half of the 42.8 million U.S. citizens in that age range (http://www.youthvote.org/vpr/facts.cfm). All the other generational cohorts increased their turnout much more significantly. Why are the young still the lowest-turnout age group? What would it take to get them to vote?
Make the issues that apply to me a national issue, rather than just talking about them on campaign stops. Tuition reform was a back-burner issue all the way, and it could have helped Kerry here. Although, he won MI anyways, so it doesn’t really matter.
Advertise on whatever stations my idiot peers watch.
Make the election into a video game.
Make the election into a drinking game.
Ya know, I really wish I were kidding.
As a college student, I sadly have to agree that this suggestion is the best.
And it also serves as a good argument for raising the voting age to 24.
And free pizza. Students will do whatever you say for free pizza.
Seriously though, I don’t think there is much that can be done to turn out the youth vote. Most young people don’t feel that politics have anything to do with them, as untrue as that may be. IMHO, the main problem is that if you were to take a survey of 1000 American or Canadian 18-24 year olds on what are their issues, 90% would say they don’t have any in terms of politics. They’re too concerned with finishing school, looking for a job, meeting a significant other or simply having a good time and getting wasted. I vote but I would say for every one of my friends that did, 9 other friends didn’t.
Pardon my middle-aged ignorance, but what exactly is “tuition reform”?
Is it anything like Welfare Reform? 
I like this idea for a drinking game-- you get a vote for each shot you are able to to take at the polling place. 10 shots before you pass out, and you get 10 votes.
PS: I was serious about the first question, btw.
Drafting a couple hundred thousand of them seems to have sparked political interest back in the 70’s
Did it? Do you have a cite that the 18 - 21 year old voting percentages have changed since the first time the age was lowered? I was under the impression that they hadn’t. Perhaps you are confusing demonstrating with voting.
It’s what happens when I’m tired and all strung out on black tea with 17 essays to evaluate and two to write.
In other words, I mis-wrote. 
Here’s what I meant (I hope): I went to see John Edwards speak here in Kalamazoo. He talked a lot about making college more affordable through public service. I heard Sen. Kerry talk about this a little bit during the debates, but nothing about it in the Michigan TV ads. So, unless my peers went to the speech or watched the debates, they didn’t hear this message.
And what kind of shots are we doing? I need to know how many votes I get. 
A plebiscite on whether to lower the drinking age back to 18!
Well, it would vary by state, like the rest of the eleciton rules. In most southern states, it would be Jack. Up north, probably Vodka (but no Grey Goose!). *Aquavit *in the upper midwest. Out here in CA, you’d be allowed to use the “one full glass of wine = one shot” rule.
I agree. That would most definitely turn out the 18-21 year olds.
Here.
The article says under 21 voting has declined since 1972. More so then the rest of the population.
In my experience, young people are more likely to see no difference between the major party candidates in a presidential election than other groups. A true multi-party system would probably go a long way towards getting the youth vote up.
ultrafilter-
Bingo! Thats exactly the problem. To me as a 18-22 year old the most important issue to me right now would be to lower the drinking age. We can be tried as adults, serve in the military and are expected to support ourselves yet we can’t have a beer at the pub? Ridiculus.
The Democrats and Republicans generally ignore the issues important to that age bracket except for throwing cheap talk towards us every so often.
Well, I’d be lying if I said that’s what I was trying to say. Here’s the point: the Democrats and Republicans do have very real differences, but there are a lot of things that they agree on. I think a lot of young people tend to focus on the commonalities of the candidates rather than the differences.
Sheesh, if you can’t even figure out your own age more accurately than that, we don’t want you to vote!
Yeah, a draft during wartime. That’s about all that would do it, I think.
You are correct. All of the above should be the same age, probably 21, or higher.
As a former teen, and a young adult still going through the throes of rebellion here’s my take (slightly tongue in cheek and allowing the Inner Cynic to be a bit snarky):
-
Don’t talk to me like I’m an idiot. I get enough of that patronizing crap from my parents.
-
Don’t call each other nasty names. It’s stupid and immature.
-
Give me topics that are directly relevant to me. Bad economy? So what? I’ve got a credit card, and the Bank of Mom and Dad. War in Iraq? I don’t need to sign up for selective service, and I know trying to institute a draft is political suicide. Yeah, it sucks that some of my friends are going there, but it sucks worse to hear you say that they’re heinous murderers. Gay marriage? I don’t care. Some of my coolest friends are gay. Gun control? Never owned one, never shot one (outside of toys).
…ah, now I think I know why most politicians don’t talk to people my age. (Too naive in one sense, too cynical in another.)
What if a politician condemned the demonization of teenagers and youth?
You know, whereby whatever it happens to be that people between age 13 and age 24 are doing in significant numbers (but not older or younger people) and therefore becomes associated with them gets condemned as socially undesirable.
You get auto insurance rates hiked to the ceiling based on your collective driving record, but you folks get that driving record to an extent because driving behaviors that don’t bother the police when I do them now, as a 45 year old, acquired tickets for me when I was younger than 20.
Does it ever bother you that IF they decided to draft someone to go off and fight in some war, it would be people your age and not people my age? But for good-paying jobs, even if I have no specific qualifications that you don’t have, I often get the nod. (This will, admittedly, change for me in the next decade, but that’s another story).
I’m not saying there are no valid reasons for considering you folks to be worse drivers, better soldiers, and riskier employment prospects. But I do wonder if you feel that y’all get the shitty end of the stick a good portion of the time, and that life could be better for you folks as a group if anyone cared to include you more. Well, they aim advertising at you and consider you a highly desireable audience when deciding which TV programs to televise, and popular culture revolves around you…what do you think, are you getting a fair shake?
How about younger folks, who don’t have the vote? Do you think you have particularly fresh memories of being 13, 15, 17, being in Middle School and High School and not having adult status, and, if so, is society being fair to them and do you, having aged out of that shit, care?