According to Rock the Vote, “
young people totally rocked the vote in 2004.” Personally, I’m a bit skeptical about the impact of the youth vote electorally, let alone the use of the word “rock” as a verb in non-musical, non-ironic contexts.
However, I am surprised that there has been relatively little discussion about what energizes young voters — if for no other reason than it is one of the media’s
favorite political tropes — especially given that this is a tight election cycle.
The problem is that politically serious discussions with young voters are hard to come by. Sure, there’s the MySpace/MTV candidates’ forum. Call me crazy, but I happen to doubt that the producers of
A Shot At Love With Tila Tequila — the first basic cable bisexual dating show aimed at teenagers and starring a
Penthouse model — will likely produce well informed young voters. Maybe I’m older than the target demographic, but after seeing a portion of episode 8, “Lapdance for Grandma,” I was ready to vote for Pat Robertson on the spot.
Fortunately, an alternative to the oversexed voter’s guide exists: the
America’s Future Foundation. AFF’s
mission is “to identify and develop … future conservative and libertarian leaders.” Among the many efforts that AFF undertakes in its cultivation of leaders is host monthly policy debates — for which I
appeared on a recent panel.
AFF hosted one such forum on Wednesday in order to discuss the candidates. The AFF lined up five panelists to make the case for each of the major Republican candidates, excepting Tancredo, Hunter, and McCain. (Rumor has it Alan Keyes offered to appear in person but apparently AFF’s standards for inclusion are stricter than those of the
Des Moines Register.)The discussion that ensued was wide-ranging and revealing, and provided a good lens through which to see what animates young conservatives and libertarians today. In introducing the event, AFF executive director David Kirby openly wished that the discussion would result in “blood on the floor,” and in that respect the event was not a disappointment.
One by one, the panelists made their cases — some candidate representatives were part of the official campaign or paid consultants, while others were merely fans of their candidate of choice; all were equally passionate. (You can read the
panelists’ bios here.)
Romney was sold as a problem solver, Rudy has leadership experience, Thompson is the only candidate that unites the conservative coalition, Paul the only candidate bold enough to be anti-war and address the structural problems of government, and Huckabee’s ability as communicator speaks to what he could accomplish even with limited resources.
Of course, none of these characterizations are particularly new. They are simply the candidates trying to put their best foot forward. The question of the evening was really what the event would tell us about young voters.
Far from the media caricature of young voters as fickle, immature slackers to whom candidates must pander, principles matter quite a lot to these up and coming conservatives. And because youth vote is so often associated with revolution and a desire for change, that unwavering ideological constancy would be so valued by a room full of young voters — even right-leaning ones — is a bit of a revelation.
CONTINUED 1 2 Next > 
