President Obama’s got problems for 2012. Sure, he just hauled in a record $86 million in cash. But the fundraising success masks a very big issue: Obama has lost the youth vote — he just isn’t trendy any more. Which is good news for Republicans: President Untrendy gives us a better chance to win. As a generation of media-encouraged Obama idealists has turned economic realists, Republicans can appeal to this age bracket to take the prize next year.
Political campaigns have historically discounted the importance of the youth vote — for good reason, generally, as young voters have tended not to show up on Election Day. Obama has changed that dynamic, perhaps permanently. The Millennial generation, meaning 18-to-29-year-olds — whom I wrote about a few weeks back — mattered in the 2008 election because Obama’s campaign recognized and exploited them. His campaign team engaged them through ground-breaking use of social media and grassroots outreach. It worked. Youth voted for Obama by a margin of 2 to 1, and 3 million more new voters visited the polls than in 2004. The Millennials accounted for 18 percent of the vote, and it was the third consecutive presidential election with increased youth turnout.
Advertisement
Young voters in 2008 were attracted to Obama as a symbol — no one knew exactly what he stood for, but voting for him sure did feel good. Nearly three years later, many of them are increasingly disgusted to learn that he apparently doesn’t stand for much. What’s his position again on gay marriage? On Afghanistan? On Iraq? Health care? The skyrocketing debt? They care little about having a symbolic leader when they can’t find jobs. The Hope and Change he promised have long since become a punch line.
When Obama spoke at the University of Maryland on Friday, student Jerome Lincolns explained how his attitude toward the president had shifted since Obama last visited the campus in 2009. “He’s like a new car: First it’s really awesome, and then you realize it’s a lot like the other cars,” Lincolns told USA Today.
Last month, a youth-advocacy group called Generation Opportunity released a bunch of very telling statistics. Headed up by a former Bush-administration official, Paul Conway, the group polled 600 likely voters in the Millennial age group. My key take-away from their findings: It’s the Obama economy, stupid.
Although young voters were embraced by the Obama campaign, they haven’t felt the same love from the Obama administration. Almost three-quarters of those surveyed by Generation Opportunity say the current administration fails to serve their generation. Less than a third approve of the president’s approach to youth unemployment. Over three-quarters have already put off, or expect to put off, a major life change or purchase because of the poor economy. Just under half are waiting to buy a home, and 27 percent are waiting to go back to school. Around one-quarter are delaying starting a family, and 18 percent are holding off on marriage.
Republican insiders I’ve spoken to in recent days almost all seem resigned to an Obama victory. That’s understandable, but not pre-ordained. All you have to do is look at those numbers from Generation Opportunity. The youth are feeling pretty dismal about the direction of Obama’s America. More than half aren’t confident that America will be the global leader in ten years. More important, they overwhelmingly view out-of-control spending and debt as the biggest threat facing America. Almost three-quarters want to see government spending reduced and do not support raising taxes. These positions sound — gasp! — Republican.
So Obama’s problem with this core constituency is an opportunity for the GOP. An opportunity — but not a slam-dunk. The youth voters are overwhelmingly moderate and issues-oriented. However, as Margaret Hoover pointed out in her new book, American Individualism, voting patterns tend to be set after three presidential elections. For about a third of the Millennial generation, this decisive third election will be the 2012 race. It’s going to be a very tough fight. Obama is going to have a record war chest. And Republican strategists are rightly worried about a primary season that could continue into next May, which would leave the eventual nominee weakened. But he or she might be able to find bounce in the younger generation.
I’ll be honest: President Untrendy is still going to seem a lot cooler than any nominee we choose. There’s no point in trying to out-hipster the man (when we went for “energy” last time, we got Sarah Palin). That doesn’t mean we should cede the Millennial battlefield. What it does means is that we must keep the message simple and focused, and we must talk directly to the young voters. We know what they want, and we know Republicans can deliver it better than Democrats. Targeting young professionals and canvassing college students — people among whom the economic anxiety of the past two years is particularly acute, and who face the highest barriers to employment — should be a main focus of the Republican effort. Trendy has never paid the bills, and this time around it might not get that many votes, either.
— Elise Jordan is a New York–based writer and commentator. She served as a director for communications in the National Security Council in 2008–09 and was a speechwriter for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
While I know no republican 'insiders', I think the positives of this article are far outweighed by that one negative, that they expect Obama to win.
If the republicans can't beat a man who in less then 4 years has rocketed the country into insolvency, destroyed or damaged relationships with every ally on the planet while emboldening every enemy then perhaps they have already become the whig party.
This is a man who seems each and every day to become more like a comic book villian set to destroy the country. Unlike in the comics, where the villians at least have a facade of doing something and for a reason this guy seems to revel in telling people his goal is destruction of the US without meaning. Also unlike the comics, this is real, people.
Agreed, it is far past the time for these Republican "insiders" to be shown the door. Perhaps with their guaranteed losers T-Paw and Huntsman polling at 2 and 3 percent, they are closer to their final exit than they know.
I agree wholeheartedly Garandman1a. If the Republicans cannot defeat this symbol of our country's destruction then the Republicans just should fold-up the shop and disappear.
I did receive some good news at an American Colonial Reenactment in Michigan. All the reenactors I talked with would definitely not vote for Little Debbie Stabenow or as one called her: Debbie Stab-in-the-back. Heartening to hear. These reenactors are from Eastern Michigan.
Do these Republican insiders still believe that it is 2008?.....You need to get some new insiders because as far as I am concerned, the word on Main street is that this clown is toast in 2012. Yes it will be a tough fight for the republican nominee but the clown-in-chief has absolutely no record to run on.....let me rephrase that....he has no Positive record to run on. I am convinced that the election will go our way after the debates just like when Reagan exposed Carter for the failure he was by using one simple question......."are you better off now than you were 4 years ago"......the answer will be a resounding "NO". Personally, I have a lot of faith that the American electorate will do the right thing and kick Barry to the curb.......BUT if they are stupid enough to allow him to remain then I might as well pack my bags and emigrate because there won't be an America worth living in after 4 more years of his destruction.
"Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" That is The Question of 2012. It must be asked to the American Electorate as many times as possible.
If they can answer The Question in all honesty, I will guarantee you this: "The One" will be sent packing.
BTW: those Republican "insiders" should be thrown out with the trash. With "friends" like them, who needs Democrats?
Don't forget that 2008 young voters overlap significantly with 2012 young voters but are not exactly the same group. The 18-29 cohort changes even more rapidly than the 65+ cohort. On the one end there are 31 year-olds who now understand what the grown-ups were talking about four years ago and who are no longer as likely to vote like grad students. On the other end are 20 year-olds who regard BHO as an "older brother band" that was cool, maybe, like way back in 2008. Sure in the middle there'll be 24 year-olds eager to vote for BHO a second time. And obviously there'll be plenty of 31 and 19 year-olds who do vote for him. But he's not likely to gain such a huge share of the vote as he did last time, now that he's been exposed. And he's also going to have more no-shows among even lukewarm supporters.
Much like on Obamacare, leftists thought the more we learned about the administration, the more we would like it. Much like on Obamacare, they were wrong.
I cast my very first vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980. Although a registered Democrat, predictably, I was one on those young college students that had seen enough malaise under Jimmy Carter. My friends and I worried about the job market and inflation, the Soviet Union's expanding influence in the world; and we couldn't believe a country run by bunch of guys in turbans had the Carter Administration on its knees. Easy to conclude Carter was the worst American President, at least in my brief lifetime.
Fast forward to November 5, 2008, the day after the election. I received an email from my very depressed daughter, a college sophomore, basically predicting the her future and the country's under Pres. Obama. To say she was dead on is an understatement. She was always skeptical about his hope and change message, often wondering what "fundamentally change this country" meant. A lover of Colonial and Revolutionary American history, she knew the fundamentals that shaped this nation: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and capitalism. They didn't need changing. She didn't like Obama's response to Joe the plumber about spreading the wealth. A student of Adam Smith, she knew that was code for socialism.
Needless to say, my daughter and her younger brothers are registered Republicans and will be voting against Mr. Untrendy, like many of their friends. No matter how much the main stream media provide cover for him, nothing spells one-term for Obama like a poor job market, stimulus spending that dug the country further into debt, the talk of shared sacrifice, and the rising influence of China. Obama gets credit for Osama bin Laden's death but earns zero points in their young minds. His DOJ wanted to bring KSM, 9/11's mastermind, to NYC for trial, a particularly galling move to them knowing their classmates' pain of losing a parent in the WTC.
Apologies from a former Democrat to our 39th president.
I think a better car analogy is:
Obama is like a new car. Totally awesome at first (questionable) but then the payment book arrives and you realize you'll be making payments for the next 40-years!
I realized about six months ago that Obama was vulnerable when several of my black 12th graders voiced disillusionment with their president. These kids had been so excited when Obama was elected, and I understood that and didn't try to rain on that parade. However, as I lead my classes, I show both sides of issues, usually without labeling either view as Dem or Rep. I let the kids decide which they agree with, and many are surprised to realize how conservative they truly are. Anyway, as the year went on, they began to see they had been sold a bill of goods. Still, I was surprised to hear them voice their disapproval of Obama's job as president.
Another factor against Obama is that guilty white liberals (like Joe Biden) just couldn' WAIT for our first black president. Well, that block has now been checked, liberal guilt has been sated, and liberals no longer HAVE to vote for Obama to prove they're not racist. They can now cast a vote against Obama without feeling that white guilt.
The Democratic party should have no appeal to young voters. The policy they deliver are strongly skewed toward older generations:
1) Union movement: with its insistence on seniority, health care and retirement if it has any appeal left (Union penetration is at historical low) it should be toward older generations.
2) Health care: basically Obama forced younger generation to subsidize older people. It might even be the right choice but there is no reason to get excited about it if you are below 30.
3) Economy: the extremely week job market is certainly not helping young job seekers or newly graduates. Providing more unemployment benefits certainly did not help the young voters joining the work force for the first time and the famous shovel ready projects never materialized.
4) Social Security. The younger generation are at high risk of paying more than ever for a service that will not deliver them much. The democrats might go with AD showing the republican pushing Granny down a cliff but the reverse of it is the fact that very little thought is given to the younger generation who are expected to support granny for the next 30 or 40 years.
Basically the younger generation should be up for grab and Obama secured its vote in 2008 only through a very successful PR operation. After 4 years with very little delivered to young voters reversing such outcome should be fairly easy.
With obama...you had to elect him to see what was in the candidate...like obamacare, it is borrow, spend, tax, unaccountability, uncertainty and blatant demagogic hyper-partisanship with no leadership/decision-making ability nor core guiding principles other than ideolgical lib/prog "ends justify the means".
I know Thomas Jefferson said the American People elect the leaders they deserve...did we really deserve obama? Thanks to the LSMedia, this real-world "Manchurian Candidate" and his handlers were not able to present the lie...the lie was actively promoted by the LSMedia.
While it's likely true the author is correct and Obama is now untrendy with youths, I don't expect those young people are "getting real" and can be swayed to conservative thinking and Republican voting. It just doesn't work that way. It's far more likely that they simply won't vote. I'm far more heartened by the young veterans generation, the young people who've spent a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan. I suspect they believe in American exceptionalism and also will have a healthy and much-needed general skepticism about expensive foreign entanglements.
There is one problem that was not pointed out: most of the people in this age group that I know, as a member of said group, are more libertarian leaning than are Republican. The Tea Party and other social conservatives put off many of us (hence why we liked Mitch Daniels). If the Republican party nominates the likes of Michelle Bachmann, the Republicans either will not win this age group because such Republicans do not reflect our views. Although I am partial to the lesser of two evils theory, rather have a truly fiscally conservative candidate (i.e. not George Bush) than a fiscally liberal candidate, there are those out there who cannot bear to vote for someone who is so embedded with social conservatives. Just a point of warning for those who refuse to nominate a socially liberal "RINO".
given that social conservatives have been pikers when it comes to controlling our lives compared to the likes of Obama, I don't believe that true libertarians see social conservatives as a greater threat than nanny staters like Obama and Bloomberg ...
any libertarian who claims that they are afraid of social conservatives more than Obama is most likely a liberal in disguise ...
Or a woman. I cannot abide the social conservative stance on contraception or sex education, and am disturbed by their hardline approach to abortion, even when the mother's health is threatened or in cases of incest or rape.
I've never understood why the Republicans always present themselves pessimistically, like these supposed "insiders" the author speaks of. You never hears Democrats talking out loud about how they think they are going to lose an election. Nancy Pelosi always talked like Bagdhad Bob during the 2010 race, no matter what the polls said.
I think the reason the so-called "insiders" are so pessimistic is because, #1 it makes them feel intellectually superior (it's more embarrassing to predict success and be wrong than to predict defeat and be wrong) and #2, they don't have faith in people to respond to an "eat your peas" conservative message that tells them they can't have more goodies from government. If these insiders would spend as much time trying to sell conservative principles to the American people as they do bemoaning how Republicans can never defeat the party of goodies, we would actually have much more success.
