Lack of focus on voters between aged 18-30

[Higgins86]

Much of the talk I have seen so far has been focused on medicare,immigration, abortion, Social security and the middle class with little focus on young voters, voters in college or voters who are just out of College. Speaking to my wife the other day she said that she doesnt think she will vote as neither party seemed focused on her generation. Who do you think is more focused on this age group and if your in that age group who do you feel will serve you best?

 

[azgreg]

Your wife may be right. I believe the young vote will go to which ever candidate puts on the best "Rock The Vote" concert.

 

[StillBallin75]

I'm not planning on voting this Presidential election either (currently 22 yrs old). I hate that the political process is essentially one of style over substance - nobody wants to offer real (practical) solutions to real issues, and everyone's just grandstanding.

Although I will most definitely vote in the Maryland referendum to legalize gay marriage.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Much of the talk I have seen so far has been focused on medicare,immigration, abortion, Social security and the middle class with little focus on young voters, voters in college or voters who are just out of College. Speaking to my wife the other day she said that she doesnt think she will vote as neither party seemed focused on her generation. Who do you think is more focused on this age group and if your in that age group who do you feel will serve you best?

Both Obama and Romney have made lazy attempts to engage this group (that I am member of), however, I agree that neither has really focused on it. In fact, I don't think either has focused on any group much. They've both been primarily focused on the economy and how it affects everybody rather than the specific interests of every population.

That said, I don't think of the value of policy in terms of only how it will directly affect me. On the contrary, I think of every policy as something that will affect me even if indirectly. For example, since I'm done with education, education policy won't directly affect me, but it does affect the future of the country that I want to succeed. Similarly, foreign policy (likely) won't directly affect me, but it will affect the money that we have left to spend on things of value that aren't wrapped up in killing people.

In both of those examples and others, I think Obama will serve my interests more than Romney would. And I, frankly, think this notion of "I won't vote because they aren't focused on my generation" is ridiculous. Almost everything they're talking about affects your generation because it affects every generation. I can't even wrap my head around that idea.

 

[Higgins86]

Both Obama and Romney have made lazy attempts to engage this group (that I am member of), however, I agree that neither has really focused on it. In fact, I don't think either has focused on any group much. They've both been primarily focused on the economy and how it affects everybody rather than the specific interests of every population.

That said, I don't think of the value of policy in terms of only how it will directly affect me. On the contrary, I think of every policy as something that will affect me even if indirectly. For example, since I'm done with education, education policy won't directly affect me, but it does affect the future of the country that I want to succeed. Similarly, foreign policy (likely) won't directly affect me, but it will affect the money that we have left to spend on things of value that aren't wrapped up in killing people.

In both of those examples and others, I think Obama will serve my interests more than Romney would. And I, frankly, think this notion of "I won't vote because they aren't focused on my generation" is ridiculous. Almost everything they're talking about affects your generation because it affects every generation. I can't even wrap my head around that idea.

well no I find it more ridiculous that you would vote for someone because what they are speaking about " will affect you in someway". Its your democratic right not to vote and I wish you could spoil your ballot paper in the US as a sign of protest as you can do in many countries. Why vote for someone who isnt directly speaking to you?

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Gee....let's see.....

Candidate #1: Tries hard to be "hip." Uses "hip" dialect on the campaign trail. Uses catchy little catch phrases. Tries not to discuss the future.
Candidate #2: Acts and looks like a businessman. Doesn't stoop to putting a little "hood" in his voice. Sends threatening messages to voters' "grandchildren."

 

[ThePlayDrive]

well no I find it more ridiculous that you would vote for someone because what they are speaking about " will affect you in someway". Its your democratic right not to vote and I wish you could spoil your ballot paper in the US as a sign of protest as you can do in many countries. Why vote for someone who isnt directly speaking to you?

This comment doesn't make any sense. Why is it ridiculous to vote for somebody whose policies will affect me? That's one of the main reasons to vote.

Also, you obviously have the right to vote. That has nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Your Star]

It's a simple fact that neither party cares about my generation(I'm currently 21), plans to help the economy, cut into the deficit, etc have no bearing on how they will impact my generation, and often are even on our backs. I have no expectations that SS, or medicare will be around when I'm 65, and all attempts to try and "fix" them are either just band-aids that are out to get the vote of people above 65, or to basically get rid of them all together.

And there are no big plans to educate my generation to any significantly level, they are cutting grants for education, as the cost of education is rising, and they are just basically ignoring us.

And it's really our fault, if we voted as much as the senior citizens voted this country would be radically different.

I do plan on voting this November, I just wish 80% of people my age did the same as well.

 

[Tigger]

And it's really our fault, if we voted as much as the senior citizens voted this country would be radically different.

I do plan on voting this November, I just wish 80% of people my age did the same as well.

You're right that if 80% of the "younger generation" (I'm 38) voted, we've be a lot worse off than we already are. Personally, I don't believe anyone under age 25 should be voting. They don't have the experience to do so, and are very often still way too immature to make appropriate and proper decisions.

 

[Your Star]

You're right that if 80% of the "younger generation" (I'm 38) voted, we've be a lot worse off than we already are. Personally, I don't believe anyone under age 25 should be voting. They don't have the experience to do so, and are very often still way too immature to make appropriate and proper decisions.

I think we'd be better off, my generation wouldn't be getting screwed over because the politicians have no ill consequences for ignoring us.

 

[Higgins86]

This comment doesn't make any sense. Why is it ridiculous to vote for somebody whose policies will affect me? That's one of the main reasons to vote.

Also, you obviously have the right to vote. That has nothing to do with what I said.

will affect you in someway ( not directly)...someway being the key word. The main reason to vote is to vote for someone you have belief in, speaks directly to you and you you think will directly benefit you ( thats my opinion anyway). I would never vote for someone if I did think they were directly speaking to me.

 

[Tigger]

I think we'd be better off, my generation wouldn't be getting screwed over because the politicians have no ill consequences for ignoring us.

The problem is that most of you have no idea what you don't know. It's an absolute cliche, but it's also true.... "If you're not a liberal at age 20 you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at age 40 you have no brain." you people are still in that period of time where you make decisions with your heart and based on what your emotions rather than on any amount of experience, logic, or reason. That's a large part of why I have a very difficult time connecting with anyone under the age of about 30 and why I prefered to spend my time with the adults by the time I was a teenager.

 

[pdog]

I'm not planning on voting this Presidential election either (currently 22 yrs old). I hate that the political process is essentially one of style over substance - nobody wants to offer real (practical) solutions to real issues, and everyone's just grandstanding.

Although I will most definitely vote in the Maryland referendum to legalize gay marriage.

Much of the talk I have seen so far has been focused on medicare,immigration, abortion, Social security and the middle class with little focus on young voters, voters in college or voters who are just out of College. Speaking to my wife the other day she said that she doesnt think she will vote as neither party seemed focused on her generation. Who do you think is more focused on this age group and if your in that age group who do you feel will serve you best?

I've got to admit, this disappoints me. I don't know your wife, but even if she knew 10% of what stillballin75 knew I would prefer to see her (and stillballin75) vote. Some elections have two strong candidates, McCain and Obama for example. This time around Obama is a much weaker opponent but to make it difficult for all of us, republicans have fielded an equally weak candidate. We're now back to the days of Kerry against Bush - picking the lesser of two evils. These are the though votes and i prefer it be done by people that have put in some critical thought on the issues to help dilute the vote of those that checked a box because they recognized the name they saw on the blue sign on the way in, or worse, simply vote straight ticket.

Voter turn out and consequently focus for the 18-30 group has always been low. If you want more focus, send them a message that you're paying attention and force their hand.

 

[Barrows]

will affect you in someway ( not directly)...someway being the key word. The main reason to vote is to vote for someone you have belief in, speaks directly to you and you you think will directly benefit you ( thats my opinion anyway). I would never vote for someone if I did think they were directly speaking to me.

That's a selfish thought process. While I'd love to see more accessible education and a better job market for my peers, I recognize that most of my interests coincide with those of the nation. I don't need to personally meet the candidates and have them pander to me based on my age. The state of the nation affects EVERYONE, including you.

Also, the ACA allows me to stay on my mother's insurance policy until I am 26. That seems like a direct benefit to me.

 

[Arbo]

I hate to say it, but Tigger is right... most people really don't have a good overall view on things when they are younger. And a good portion of them loose their idealistic views when they grow up. So what they vote for when younger, often turns out to be something they don't want when they are older.

In other news, it seems in the young category, more are leaning towards Romney:

A Romney first: over 40% of youth vote back him | WashingtonExaminer.com

 

[ThePlayDrive]

will affect you in someway ( not directly)...someway being the key word.

Some way isn't particularly "key" for me. I'm not in school anymore, so education policy doesn't directly affect me. However, it will affect the future of this country and it will affect our potential for medical, scientific and technological innovation that might save my life one day or that will ensure the United States maintains dominance in the world. You seem to think "some way" refers to minor things. It doesn't. Some of the things that affect me indirectly are pretty big deals. As a result, I would consider it ridiculous to not vote just because my generation isn't being directly addressed.

The main reason to vote is to vote for someone you have belief in, speaks directly to you and you you think will directly benefit you ( thats my opinion anyway).

That's one of the main reasons, sure. That's not the only one. The one I listed is included as well.

I would never vote for someone if I did think they were directly speaking to me.

Well, I think that's selfish, irresponsible and potentially lazy. It's selfish because it means you don't care about how a candidate's policies will affect other people. It's irresponsible because you aren't using what influence you have to steer the country in a positive direction or at least prevent it from going down a horrible road. It's potentially lazy because, unless you're doing something productive to get candidates to address you directly, you're taking the laziest road to solve the problem by not voting.

 

[Higgins86]

That's a selfish thought process. While I'd love to see more accessible education and a better job market for my peers, I recognize that most of my interests coincide with those of the nation. I don't need to personally meet the candidates and have them pander to me based on my age. The state of the nation affects EVERYONE, including you.

Also, the ACA allows me to stay on my mother's insurance policy until I am 26. That seems like a direct benefit to me.

its not a case of pandering an age group its a case of not feeling involved. Why should someone like my wife vote if she doesnt feel like the current political system is geared towards her generation? As SB noted the parties show no interest in finding soloutions for the countries problems instead they seem much more focused on putting on a "show". Im a little shocked that so many of you seem to vote without really caring about what the candidate has to offer you and how he will affect your personal future. I find it a little irresponsible that you all just vote for the sake of it.

 

[Higgins86]

Some way isn't particularly "key" for me. I'm not in school anymore, so education policy doesn't directly affect me. However, it will affect the future of this country and it will affect our potential for medical, scientific and technological innovation that might save my life one day or that will ensure the United States maintains dominance in the world. You seem to think "some way" refers to minor things. It doesn't. Some of the things that affect me indirectly are pretty big deals. As a result, I would consider it ridiculous to not vote just because my generation isn't being directly addressed.


That's one of the main reasons, sure. That's not the only one. The one I listed is included as well.


Well, I think that's selfish, irresponsible and potentially lazy. It's selfish because it means you don't care about how a candidate's policies will affect other people. It's irresponsible because you aren't using what influence you have to steer the country in a positive direction or at least prevent it from going down a horrible road. It's potentially lazy because, unless you're doing something productive to get candidates to address you directly, you're taking the laziest road to solve the problem by not voting.

you realize when I say speaking to me directly im reffering to a generation of people ( millions of people) im not asking them to come around my house for tea. You can call it lazy if you want to but I personally find it very irresponsible that you would vote in someone who doesnt really appeal to you. Almost voting for the sake of voting at that point

 

[Tigger]

I hate to say it, but Tigger is right... most people really don't have a good overall view on things when they are younger. And a good portion of them loose their idealistic views when they grow up. So what they vote for when younger, often turns out to be something they don't want when they are older.

Which is exactly why I'd be for increasing the voting age to 25 and for requiring a poll exam (yes, I know the Constitution would have to be amended) before ANYONE was allowed to vote.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

you realize when I say speaking to me directly im reffering to a generation of people ( millions of people) im not asking them to come around my house for tea.

I know who you're referring to and I didn't assume you want people to come to your house for tea. My comments were a direct response to notion that it makes sense to not vote for someone just because they don't address your direct interests. Do you care to address any of that, particularly the parts about how policy that doesn't directly affect you can still have a tremendous impact on your life, the state of your nation and the lives of other people?

You can call it lazy if you want to but I personally find it very irresponsible that you would vote in someone who doesnt really appeal to you. Almost voting for the sake of voting at that point

If you think I've argued for anything even close to "voting for the sake of voting," then you haven't actually payed attention to anything that I've written. What I've actually argued for is four things: 1. Voting when policy indirectly impacts you. 2. Voting when policy directly impacts you even if it's not directly address to you. 3. Voting when policy affects others even if it doesn't affect you.

Can you address that or would you prefer to simply distort my position?

 

[StillBallin75]

The problem is that most of you have no idea what you don't know. It's an absolute cliche, but it's also true.... "If you're not a liberal at age 20 you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at age 40 you have no brain." you people are still in that period of time where you make decisions with your heart and based on what your emotions rather than on any amount of experience, logic, or reason. That's a large part of why I have a very difficult time connecting with anyone under the age of about 30 and why I prefered to spend my time with the adults by the time I was a teenager.

I've addressed the Churchill quote multiple times. It's complete bull****. If this site isn't pure evidence that many folks at age 40 have neither hearts nor brains, then I don't know what is. It's more a generational thing than an age thing - young folks who grew up during the Reagan era started out conservative, and to this day generally remain conservative.

 

[StillBallin75]

I've got to admit, this disappoints me. I don't know your wife, but even if she knew 10% of what stillballin75 knew I would prefer to see her (and stillballin75) vote. Some elections have two strong candidates, McCain and Obama for example. This time around Obama is a much weaker opponent but to make it difficult for all of us, republicans have fielded an equally weak candidate. We're now back to the days of Kerry against Bush - picking the lesser of two evils. These are the though votes and i prefer it be done by people that have put in some critical thought on the issues to help dilute the vote of those that checked a box because they recognized the name they saw on the blue sign on the way in, or worse, simply vote straight ticket.

Voter turn out and consequently focus for the 18-30 group has always been low. If you want more focus, send them a message that you're paying attention and force their hand.

Well, also keep in mind that my state almost always goes blue during Presidential elections, so Obama is pretty much guaranteed Maryland's electoral votes. Now if my state were a battleground swing state that could potentially go to the Romney/Ryan ticket, I'd definitely be more inclined to go out there and vote for Obama again. But ultimately I don't think either set of candidates is able to get the country back on track when it's Congress that's the real problem IMHO.

 

[tessaesque]

If young voters don't feel represented I think it's because they don't realize that polices created today will eventually effect them significantly. We could probably ask for more emphasis on things like college costs (already being addressed in bass-akwards ways), first-time employment (can't really be fixed until we get other crap fixed), and whatever else.

But my biggest concerns are government spending and failing social programs I'm mandated to pay into. Nothing will effect me more than a bankrupt country. I don't care about college costs (if you're smart about it, you'll incur very little debt paying for school). I don't care about abortion (it won't be criminalized entirely, and the courts will take care of the crude laws recently enacted to emotionally confuse women seeking them). I care moderately about illegal immigration, but neither party seems to truly take it seriously, so why not just focus on the biggest issue?

Personally, I think the 18-30 crowd tends to be a little selfish.

 

[Tigger]

I've addressed the Churchill quote multiple times. It's complete bull****. If this site isn't pure evidence that many folks at age 40 have neither hearts nor brains, then I don't know what is. It's more a generational thing than an age thing - young folks who grew up during the Reagan era started out conservative, and to this day generally remain conservative.

I agree there's a generational component to it, but I also believe that the Churchill quote does have some merit to it as well.

I deal with young (mid-20's) engineers on a daily basis. The vast majority of them are very smart and almost as completely naive. Regardless of what their background is, these people have not been forced to actually grow up and become adults yet. They think with their heart rather than their head and until someone comes around and shows them the error of their ways, they will continue to.

 

[Arbo]

its not a case of pandering an age group its a case of not feeling involved. Why should someone like my wife vote if she doesnt feel like the current political system is geared towards her generation? As SB noted the parties show no interest in finding soloutions for the countries problems instead they seem much more focused on putting on a "show". Im a little shocked that so many of you seem to vote without really caring about what the candidate has to offer you and how he will affect your personal future. I find it a little irresponsible that you all just vote for the sake of it.

If you think what a president does, has no effect on you, you are not looking at the big picture and the long term. If you think president must offer you something, or have a policy that directly effects you in order for you to care, then you are a selfish ....

Every election matters, even when it might only be a small difference, because it does drive what happens, and like it or not, see it or not, it will effect you in one way or another.