IU voters increase by 287 percent
James Brosher |
IDS
Students read newspapers, worked on homework or talked to friends while waiting in a long line to vote Tuesday morning at Read Landes. Poll workers said several people were waiting in line around 5 a.m. to vote. The polls did not open until 6 a.m.
By
Zina Kumok |
IDS
POSTED AT
11:39 PM ON Nov. 5, 2008
| PRINT |
Email
| SHARE
| COMMENTS (10)
Typically a forgotten demographic, youth voters created a big splash Tuesday night.
The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement reported between 21.6 million and 23.9 million 18- to 29-year-olds participated in Tuesday’s election, at least a 2 million voter increase from 2004. On campus, Indiana Public Interest Research Group reported at least a 287 percent increase from 2004 among IU students.
President of IU College Democrats Anna Strand said the young voters’ influence in the race shows a changing attitude toward their ability to sway elections.
“We have control over these things,” Strand said. “People have also decided ‘I am going to vote, I have the right and opportunity to have my voice heard.’ I think that’s what we see this year, people taking control of their country.”
IU College Republicans chairwoman Chelsea Kane said she expects both parties to reach out more to young voters. However, Kane said she was disappointed in students who voted for Obama because they were captivated by his rhetoric.
“I think if you’re voting based on the eloquence and charisma of a candidate, you probably don’t need to be voting at all,” Kane said. “That’s not what America is about. We’re supposed to be voting for the best man for the office. This is not about how well you speak. This is about what you can do for this country.”
Political science senior lecturer Christine Barbour said President-elect Barack Obama’s request for support from younger voters led to their overwhelming support.
“Most candidates forget young people are there,” Barbour said. “They assume they don’t participate, and so they don’t really try to engage them. I’ve seen a couple of times where a politician reached a hand out and said ‘I want your support’ and speak to issues young people care about, and he did it.”
Barbour said the 2004 presidential race served as a catalyst for 2008’s monumental results.
“There is a huge reaction among younger people toward the war in Iraq, which spurred much of the support for (John) Kerry (in 2004),” Barbour said. “I think young people are not particularly engaged by the Bush administration.”
After working at the Obama headquarters, Strand said many of the volunteers were teenagers in high school. She cited one 14-year-old boy who volunteered for hours daily and was as informed as Strand’s fellow college students.
“I think that the trickle-down effect is undeniable,” she said. “These kids are already engaged.”
Barbour agreed, saying Americans should count on this current generation’s future activism. However, Barbour cautioned against depending on younger teens who might grow up in a less politically volatile time.
“Once you do get involved, you tend to stay more engaged,” she said. “That’s not to say those behind you will participate. If we get out of the war and the economy improves, if people get fat and happy again, I can imagine people will have the luxury of tuning out again.”
Associate professor of psychology Edward R. Hirt said Obama’s fresh perspective and eloquent personality drew voters to him.
“People were able to relate to Obama as a candidate in a way we haven’t had in similar elections,” Hirt said. “His popularity among young voters was kind of unprecedented in the last few elections.”
Hirt compared Obama’s likability among the younger demographic to John F. Kennedy. Like Obama’s groundbreaking victory, Kennedy was elected as the first Catholic and youngest elected president. He also brought a young wife and two young children to the White House.
“All those things made (Kennedy) kind of more appealing to a different generation of people,” Hirt said. “There do seem to be some nice connections there between how excited people are and how motivating he was.”
Looking toward the future, Hirt said it seems impossible to predict whether Tuesday’s surge was a fluke or a turning of the tide.
“I think it kind of depends on who the other candidates are, how much of a need for change and motivate versus satisfaction and status quo in future elections,” Hirt said. “It certainly seemed this (election) was at a pivotal time in our nation’s history.”