Voters

18 and Life To Vote

In the radio and music industry, it's understood that people establish lifelong musical preferences in their teens and early 20's.  Nate Silver says this may also be true of political preferences.  Looking at new Gallup data on partisan identification by age, Silver tried mapping it against the question: "who was President when you turned 18?"

As it turns out, "the popularity -- or lack thereof -- of the President when the voter turned 18 would seem to have a lot of explanatory power for how their politics turned out later on".

In general, however, this points toward the idea that partisan identification -- while not exactly being "hard-wired" -- can be quite persistent as the voter moves through her lifecourse. Voters who came of age during the eight years of the Bush Presidency are roughly eight points more Democratic than the rest of the country; that advantage could be worth an extra point or two to Democrats throughout the next half-century.

As Kristen Soltis has pointed out here recently, "young voters began abandoning the Republican Party long before Barack Obama was even a serious contender for the presidency. Those pinning the Republican Party's poor fortunes among young voters on the Obama candidacy miss the source of the problem and certainly underestimate its severity."

Lesson: Republicans had better become more appealing to young people, because patterns established in youth persist for life. 

CURBING GOVERNMENT & EMPOWERING PEOPLE; An interview with Steve Lonegan - Part II

antlone1Bookmark and Share Confident that he will be the Republican nominee for Governor, Steve Lonegan answered questions in this interview in a way that came across to me as a back to basics strategy. A strategy that would scale back the scope of government and their intrusiveness in our lives. A strategy that intends to strip off the extras which cost us more.

In the previous installment of this interview, we got a good glimpse of that approach to government when the Mayor answered questions involving the Committee On Affordable Housing. Aside from calling the actions of the committee “leftwing social engineering“ he called for its abolishment. Such signs of Lonegans desire to put government back in its proper place are most evident in the area of taxes.

In part two of this interview, Lonegan volunteered that the “first thing” he needs “to do in the state of New Jersey is to cut taxes“. He says “we have the worst income tax, we have the highest top end rate in the east at 9%, we have the highest sales tax in the nation and the highest property taxes“. The former mayor claims that these exorbitant taxes are all “a result of the massive growth of state government”.

He adds that “we also have the worst estate tax in the country so not only can you not afford to live here, you can’t afford to die here” and he made it clear that under a Lonegan administration, the solution that he will provide to the problem will be achieved by cutting taxes across the board which you do by cutting the size of government. He added that he will do so by “cutting it with an axe, not a scalpel”.

  • …..“The number one driving force behind increases in property taxes in New Jersey is the state government“…..-Steve Lonegan, 1/21/09-POLITICS 24/7 interview

As for property taxes Lonegan believes the key to solving the problem is lifting government off of our backs and giving mayors and local council members “back the tools they need to govern effectively rather than become functionaries of the state whose job it becomes to implement all the COAH mandates and all the other unfunded mandates that Trenton heaps on the backs of local officials.”

Stating that after 12 years as Mayor of Bogotá he knows the burdens of which he speaks, and proclaimed that he knows what it takes to cut taxes and that due to the overreaching that Trenton participates in, local “officials do not have the tools” to cut taxes ."

He added “we need to eliminate COAH which will be driving up our property taxes. We need to give mayors and councils the ability to negotiate union contracts on a fair playing field and we need to give school boards the ability to negotiate teachers contracts and give them a fair playing field which they do not have now."

  • ....."The real losers here are the students"..... -Steve Lonegan, 1/21/09-POLITICS 24/7 interview

Another factor, one of the most important factors, in rising property taxes is the 15 year old Abbot School funding formula which Lonegan clearly states is plain wrong. Calling the Abbot funding system “another product of our liberal state supreme court”,

Lonegan explains that we have the 33 most expensive school districts in America. “These are the Abbot districts where spending per student ranges as much as $2,500 and in some cases $3,000 per student and the real travesty here is that after billions and billions of dollars pored into these school districts, we still have students coming out of these school districts with a less than mediocre education, often in unsafe schools”, he added.

  • ….“I think the idea of collecting money from people and sending it back is absurd”….. - Steve Lonegan, 1/21/09-POLITICS 24/7 interview

Still on the topic of property taxes, I asked the Mayor what he thought of the homestaed rebate program which eligible homeowners recieve after paying their taxes. His response was expected and right on the mark. "I think the idea of collecting money money from people and sending it back is absurd. I think the whole sytem should be eliminated" said Lonegan. He further stated that as governor, as he reduces the size of government, "one of the programs that will go will be the homestaed rebate program".

  • ....."cut taxes for everyone"..... -Steve Lonegan, 1/21/09-POLITICS 24/7 interview

But before anyone takes tthe line about doing away with the homestaead rebate and tries to paint Lonegan as someone who refuses to make it easier for taxpayers in New Jersey, he made clear that his goal is to "cut taxes for everyone and give them real tax cuts, not some phomy income redistribution scheme that requires people to call into some stupid phone number and wait for an hour".

Steve believes that if we can "start cutting the state's income and sales tax for the people, they will say, we don't want your rebate anymore" As for the education of our children Lonegan declared that the highlight of his career will be the day that he signs a bill requiring every Abbot school districts to "give a quality education to students with the same funding as every other school district in the state of New Jersey".

If they don't, Lonegan demands that they give each parent of those students a voucher so that they can go to the school of their choice. With much of our discussion dealing with funding and mandates I asked Mayor Lonegan if as Governor, he would refuse any federal funding for the state because of strings that may be attached to it.

When it comes to our return on the tax dollar that New Jerseyans send to Washington, D.C., most of it has to do with the ability of our representatives in D.C. and how good they are at delivering for the state. Our representatives in the U.S. Senate, Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez have been a sleep and during their naps, New Jersey has fallen to last place when it comes to the money we get back from Washington.

Although New Jersey could use all the help it can get right now, I asked Steve if there was any limit to what help he would reject t from Washington because of some of the federal strings attached to it.

His matter of fact response was “I certainly would, it depends on the strings of course so it has to be analyzed case by case." The mayor did feel that it is a “sad state of affairs when the federal government uses money to manipulate us into implementing their agenda on the state level."

But that answer cuts both ways. For instance, I am a supporter of legislation sponsored by Texas Senator John Cornyn, which prohibits the use of federal money involving projects that a state or local entity obtains through eminent domain policies. I also support federal legislation to link the refusal of Homeland Security dollars to states that allow themselves to be sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. However the Mayor’s comment has merit. There are many cases where the federal government does refuse to turn over money to a state if they fall short of adopting some of D.C's intended social engineering programs, programs like COAH for example, and besides, he did state that he looks forward to the day when we don't need any help from Washington.

All in all Steve Lonegan presented a great case for not only conservatives but for taxpayers as well.

He also demonstrated that someone with the experience of a New Jersey township or municipal mayor, might just be what New Jersey needs in a Governor. Who knows best what the ramifications of Trenton’s decisions are in the towns, villages, cities and municipalities, throughout our state, than a mayor who has had to deal with what comes out of Trenton?

His points are hard to argue and the only real area for debate, regarding his points, deal with the approach to the solutions of each of those points and that’s what the Republican primary for the gubernatorial nomination will be all about. In the next part of this interview we will get into that debate as we ask the Mayor about his opponents and his chances of winning. We will also get into what may become a political liability and deep bump in Lonegan's road to victory among Republicans. Bookmark and Share

punchline-politics

A friend of mine is in the naval reserves................

A few weeks ago, He was attending a conference that included admirals in both the US and the French navies. At a cocktail reception, my friend found himself in a small group that included an admiral from each of the two navies.

The French admiral started complaining that whereas Europeans learned many languages, Americans only learned English. He then asked. "Why is it that we have to speak English in these conferences rather than you have to speak French?"

Without even hesitating, the American admiral replied. "Maybe it is because we arranged it so that you did not have to learn to speak German."

The group became silent.

Submitted by Mike, Broomfield, Co.

Photobucket

Be Sure To Sign The Petition To

REPEAL THE CONGRESSIONAL PAY HIKE

Sign the Online Petition - Repeal The Automatic Pay Raise That Congress Is Receiving

Pass The Link On To Family, Friends and Co-workers

http://www.gopetition.com/online/24301.html

Photobucket

AND DON'T FORGET.............

BE SURE TO SIGN THE PETITION URGING THE NOMINATION

OF SENATOR BECK FOR LT. GOV.

RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite

Take The POLITICS 24/7 Poll

[polldaddy poll=1277750]

FAREWELL PRESIDENT BUSH - THANK YOU FOR SERVING WELL

antpresidentbushdeparts2whitehousebltnfaadgnllThere remain only a few hours left in the presidency of  George W. Bush. For eight years he has given us his best. There were some low points but there were fewer than the media and liberals would have you believe.

Katrina was a low point but even that, President Bush really can’t take all the blame for himself . But for liberals, President Bush was there scapegoat.

Hurricane Katrina ravaged Mississippi every bit as much as it did Louisiana, yet Mississippi, under the leadership of Republican Governor Haley Barbour, did not encounter the same long duration of recovery or mishandled evacuations that  Louisiana  did.

Mississippi’s local leaders did not decide to park their buses on low lying surfaces as did New Orleans’ Democrat Mayor, Ray Nagin.

No, Mississippi’s first line of defense in natural disasters, their local governments, the governments closest to the people, came through and were every bit as prepared as they told the federal government that they were. Not so in New Orleans though.

But a liberal bias from the media helped to make Hurricane Katrina President Bush’s fault.

Shortly after the events of Hurricane Katrina many left leaning conspiracy theorists also claimed that Hurricane Katrina and a few of its devastating predecessors were the product of Japan where the Japanese government was inventing a new weapon that increased the intensity of tropical storms into category 5 hurricanes and directed them to land masses that they targeted.

Many of the same people who made this claim gave blame to George Bush. That should tell you something.anthurricane20katrina20image

Although Katrina may not have been Bush’s fault, the recovery effort in Louisiana does get blamed on him and to a degree that is acceptable. But I guess, on the other side of the coin, the successfully rapid recovery in Mississippi warrants some credit for President Bush?

Putting aside the blame game of Hurricane Katrina, there are two things that when grading this presidency, bring his average down.

The first is his delay in approving the surge that his own Secretary of State urged for a year before he finally accepted it.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice  had been advocating for more troops in Iraq. It was a strategy called “clear, hold and build”. It was also the same strategy that Senator John McCain called for.

Clear, hold and build was successfully used by Col. H.R. McMaster in the Iraqi city of Tal Afar. The strategy called for door to door operations that cleared insurgents from the city along with an ongoing troop presence in each neighborhood that was cleared. Once this was achieved residents felt secure, and U.S. troops were able to begin rebuilding there. Wherever this strategy was conducted, it worked. The resurgents were gone and our continued presence there, prevented them from returning. As a result, citizens no longer lived in fear and life began to flow unimpeded by terror and violence. To carry out clear, hold and build, more troops were required. But increasing the number of troops was not something the administration wanted to advocate for. Although it was required in order to successfully carry out clear, hold, build the administration was afraid of the reaction to such a call.

The President flinched in this area. It was one of the few instances where he allowed public perception to make him second guess his policy judgment. After Viet Nam, we should have learned that if you are going to enter into a fight, throw everything you have into it from the onset. Otherwise don’t get into the fight.

In the case of Iraq, we held back. Had we went along with the surge from the beginning, we would have avoided the upsurge in violence that led to the waning of support for the war effort.

The other area of deep negative impact on this administration was the financial collapse that brought on the current economic crisis.

President Bush does not get blamed for causing the collapse, but it happened under his watch and it should not have.

The President, through his advisers, should have seen this coming and helped to avoid it.

He should have aggressively turned back some of the policies which led to the overextended loan practices which ultimately tied up loans and the markets.

Many of the policies that brought us to this point were from Bill Clinton’s administration.

Clinton‘s National Homeowners Strategy was a financial scheme that promoted insanely low down payments and coerced lenders into giving mortgage loans to first-time buyers with unstable financing and incomes.

It was a way to increase home ownership. That is an admirable motive but as usual, the liberal mentality, forced government to do that which it should not have done. Essentially, the Clinton era initiatives that forced government action on private sector interests led to the need for government to take over FannieMae and FreddieMac. This is not to say that private sector greed and bad business practices did not add to the wrong minded government policy, it did, but what happened here is that government solutions to one problem, created another . Now, ironically, the government which helped to create this problem is having to solve it.As for George Bush, this all came to a head under his watch. For that he must be blamed.

So we have the recovery effort in Louisiana, delaying the surge in Iraq and not avoiding the economic crises that we are in, all helping to lower the average of this administrations grade.

I have two more things to add though.

One is immigration.

On immigration President Bush was most inept. On this issue his positions were no where near appropriate for the leader of a sovereign nation.

antgall_texmex_giThe Presidents refusal to accept that illegal immigrants are participating in illegal conduct that needs to be prosecuted was a horribly blundered policy and it is one that has not helped to solve our border security problem or alleviate the continued problem of illegal immigration.

The other issue I hold against President Bush is his administrations inability to articulate their cause in a way that appealed to the people convincingly.

The administration had been doing quite well in it’s first two years when the voice of the President came from then White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. Once Ari Fleischer left and Scott McClellan entered the picture, the White House lost any sway with the press or the public.

This President was great with messages when we were in crisis and he had the people’s attention, but in between crisis his message was jumbled and unconvincing. That, for this administration, was half of the battle and after Fleischer left they lost it.

On the upside President Bush has many, much wrongly maligned, initiatives to help bring his grade up.

Their was his “Faith Based Initiative” which allowed government to accept the involvement of religious institutions in helping out. Faith based initiatives were no longer penalized or denied by the federal government because of religion. It was something long over due in America, especially in an America where religion is not to persecuted against.

There was “No Child Left Behind”.

This policy was one which had universal support except for some extremist fringe players and teachers union.. But not willing to give credit where credit was due, liberals charged that President Bush backed out of his No Child Left Behind policy by under funding it.

Truth be told, federal education spending is at record levels so that argument doesn’t swim.

There are many other policies such as the Medicare prescription drug benefit, enacted in 2003. It triggered competition between drug companies and wound up costing less than expected.

The Bush tax policy is also to his credit. He didn’t ask for lips to read on this issue, he simply created no new taxes and when he did not reduce them he held the line on them. I only wish he could have added drastic spending cuts to that.

Another high point in this administration was the appointment of two supreme court justices, one being the chief justice.

antaliThe appointments of  John Roberts  and  Sam Alito  were remarkably good choices. Neither had any judicial or ant070628_juris_johnrobertsexpersonal blemishes and neither see the role of the judiciary to be one that makes law but rather interprets it. Add to that their relative youthful ages and the Roberts and Alito appointments to the bench will have a profound on our great nation for decades to come.

The next greatest achievement of the administration was twofold. It involves The War On Terror and Iraq.

Despite charges that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, the two are entwined together as violent threats.

Pre-Saddam Hussein Iraq did not send to us the pilots that took nearly 3,000 Americans in one day but it had intentions just as dire.

Saddam did not have any tangible links to 9/11 but he did have links to terrorist, including several who dabbled with Al Quaeda and he did continuously break and defy the cease fire agreement that he signed after the first Gulf War. Combine that with the fact that everyone from  Bill Clinton  and  Al Gore  to  John Kerry  and  Ted Kennedy  swore that Saddam was a threat and you had every reason in the world to eliminate Saddam Hussein.

After 9/11 George W. Bush realized that we must eliminate threats before they eliminate us and so he took out the threat known as Saddam Hussein.  In doing so not is democracy being brought to the Middle East but the power and richness of freedom is being delivered to a people that have long since forgotten what independence offers.

Add to that that you can say what you want, but we no longer have to worry about any threat Saddam intended, and for that I thank the President.

I also Thank him for the second part of this  War On Terror  effort.   Under his watch not another single attack occurred on mainland territory since 9/11.

Now if you want to blame Katrina on Bush because it happened during his watch you must also credit him for there being no more attacks under his watch. And when you think about, more attacks occurred under Bill Clinton then George Bush, so I thank President Bush for that as well.

The final most valuable thing brought to life under President Bush goes back to exactly four years ago.

In his inaugural address , after being sworn in for the second time, President Bush stated:

America has need of idealism and courage, because we have essential work at home – the unfinished work of American freedom. In a world moving toward liberty, we are determined to show the meaning and promise of liberty.”

He went on to articulate a policy that directed the United States to end tyranny in the world as we know it.

Now some may have seen that as a declaration of war by him but most read it the right way.

He went on to say………“We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation: The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.”

antbush-2innAll who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.:”

The speech has since been forgotten by most but it has not been forgotten by me and hopefully President Barack Obama will also remember it..

In its entirety, the address presented the essence of what it means to be an American and it captured the most important role that America must play in this world as its current, last remaining superpower.

For me it Bush’s second inaugural address was the foundation for our greatest doctrine ever, the doctrine to achieve and true freedom and peace.

When you have the time, click here and read the speech. You will be moved and you will understand our place in this world.

The bottom line…….

President Bush is a good man and was a good President. He will not go down in history ranked along side of Washington or Lincoln nor will he be lumped together with Franklin Pierce or Jimmy Carter.

Ultimately, I believe George W. Bush warrants a B-.

Many on the left will now assault me for giving that grade but I base George Bush’s presidency on the truth of reality not on the lies and distortions that they have spent the last eight years perpetuating and when you add that to the retrospect of history, I believe George W. Bush’s name  will slowly rise to its proper placement among American presidents.

That is something that will take time.

As President Bush recently put it, “they’re still debating and writing about how good or bad George Washington was, so I assume the same will happen to me”.

punchline-politics21

Once upon a time, in a village, a man appeared and announced to the villagers…

… that he would buy monkeys for $10 each.

The villagers seeing that there were many monkeys around, went out to the forest, and started catching them. The man bought thousands at $10 and as supply started to diminish, the villagers stopped their effort.

 

He further announced that he would now buy at $20. This renewed the efforts of the villagers and they started catching monkeys again.

 

Soon the supply diminished even further and people started going back to their farms.

 

The offer increased to $25 each and the supply of monkeys became so little that it was an effort to even see a monkey, let alone catch it!

 

The man now announced that he would buy monkeys at $50! However, since he had to go to the city on some business, his assistant would now buy on behalf of him.

 

In the absence of the man, the assistant told the villagers. ‘Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that the man has collected. I will sell them to you at $35 and when the man returns from the city, you can sell them to him for $50 each.’

The villagers rounded up with all their savings and bought all the monkeys.

 

Then they never saw the man nor his assistant, only monkeys everywhere!

 

Now you have a better understanding of how the stock market works.

Submitted by Dick, Williamsport, Md.

Bookmark and Share

 RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite

Be Sure To Sign The Petition To

REPEAL THE CONGRESSIONAL PAY HIKE

Sign the Online Petition - Repeal The Automatic Pay Raise That Congress Is Receiving

Pass The Link On To Family, Friends and Co-workers

http://www.gopetition.com/online/24301.html

Bookmark and ShareDigg!

RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite

                 

Legitimacy - America Threatened by Obama Acorn Relationship - #Acorn

Acorn doesn't fall far from ObamaAmerica is about to be ruled by an illegitimate government founded on fraud and outright criminality. Bill Wilson, Americans for Limited Government: All governments rise or fall on the degree to which the people find them legitimate. When the people no longer believe a government has gained power by legitimate means or that a government operates in an honest and legitimate manner, only force and intimidation maintains it. And as history has shown repeatedly, no amount of force or state-terror against the populous is ever enough to prevail. True, brute thuggish tactics can hold off the will of the people for a long time. It worked for over 70 years in Russia, but only 12 in Nazi Germany. It has been effective in Cuba for nearly 50 years, but fell quickly in Cambodia.

One of the true strengths of the United States has been the accepted process for the peaceful transfer of power from one group of people to another. This process, elections held at regular intervals, has conferred that most precious of all commodities on the United States Government: legitimacy. But in 2008, in a desperate drive for power, that most valuable of gifts from our Founding Fathers is being abused and discarded. Simply put, it is becoming more and more evident every day that the elections this year may not be legitimate, that the “winners” will not be able to claim they assumed office in a fair and open manner. In short, we could be about to be ruled by an illegitimate government founded on fraud and outright criminality.   All across America reports are coming in of obvious voter fraud. . . . [ARRA News -- Full Story on Legitimacy]

Voters Reject Obama's call for Bilingualism

Is it just me, or is this a golden opportunity issue for McCain to exploit? Rasmussen's poll responders certainly seem to think so, to the tune of 59% of Democrats and 79% of Republicans...

Barack Obama's Call for Bilingualism

Barack says:  "It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here and they speak English, they speak French, they speak German and we go over to Europe and all we can say is, Merci Beaucoup....right?"

Barack Obama said yesterday that “instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English,” Americans “need to make sure your child can speak Spanish.” A national telephone survey conducted last month by Rasmussen Reports found that U.S. voters overwhelmingly disagree with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. 

Eighty-three percent (83%) place a higher priority on encouraging immigrants to speak English as their primary language. Just 13% take the opposite view and say it is more important for Americans to learn other languages.

In his comments, Obama emphasized the economic benefits of learning a second language: “If you have a foreign language, that is a powerful tool to get a job.” Data suggests that most voters see the issue in a broader context.

A separate survey found that one factor fueling the anger over immigration is the belief that most government officials encourage immigrants to retain the culture of their home country. This helps explain why voters who are angry about immigration are primarily angry at the government, not immigrants. Among those angry about immigration, 59% believe most government officials encourage immigrants to retain their home country culture.

Last fall, a Rasmussen Reports survey found that 77% of Americans believed that employers should be allowed to require employees to speak English while on the job. With the Supreme Court recently upholding tougher standards for voter identification at the polls, 65% of voters now believe election ballots should only be printed in English. Thirty-two percent (32%) say they should be printed in both English and Spanish.

The importance of assimilation into the culture is highlighted in another recent survey: 54% of voters say it is more important to encourage all immigrants to embrace American culture than it is to reduce the number of immigrants. Just 36% take the opposite view and say reducing immigration is a higher priority. That survey, as with many others, also found a strong preference for ballots and other government documents to be printed in English only.

Only 26% believe that every American should be able to speak at least two languages. In his recent comments, Obama said parents should be thinking, “How can your child become bilingual? We should have every child speaking more than one language.“

Broken down along party lines, 79% of Republicans and 59% of Democrats reject the idea that all Americans should know multiple languages. Among unaffiliated voters, 68% say their fellow citizens do not need to know a language other than English.

 

Young Internet Voter.com

[Promoted - The internet is becoming more and more important in politics, and Republicans are not doing well in that space.  This is going to have an impact that lasts for generations.  - Jon Henke]

We get it, the Internet matters - but how much in the political world? And what about younger voters? Will the Web affect the way they cast their ballots on Election Day? We found out. Waggener Edstrom Worldwide Young Internet Voter of 2008 StudyEarlier this week, Waggener Edstrom Worldwide released results from the Young Internet Voter of 2008 Study. We wanted to learn more about Young Internet Voters (18-35 year olds) and how they are using digital communications to gather information about the 2008 U.S. presidential race. As Waggener Edstrom's Vice President of Digital Strategies, and former White House Internet Director, I noted several points of interest based on our findings.

  • It’s the Medium, Not the Message: The WE survey strikes another fairly significant ‘blow’ at traditional media, finding that an overwhelming majority (76%) prefer online sources for news and information rather than the traditional news sources. The primary reasons for this shift in preference - respondents feel the latter attempts to control and shape the news in a way they find problematic and off-putting. Some positive news, however, did emerge for traditional media: 38% of those responding to the survey have more confidence in its content; as opposed to slightly more than 30% who have confidence in Internet content.
  • Digital Strategy Trumps Traditional Marketing/PR: The study further revealed that the Web and digital communications have helped bring teens and young adults into the fold this election cycle – more so that the candidates’ themselves or their personalities (e.g. Obamamania). Specifically 57% strongly or somewhat agree that the Internet and digital media have facilitated them feeling more engaged in this year's election process – more than they ever have in the past.
  • Engaging with Digital Substance: While the Internet is surely playing a role and young voters are poised to turn out in record numbers in November, the campaigns have yet to engage young voters - a crucial demographic bloc in November - in substantial policy discussions.
  • Getting Social: Perhaps some of the most telling statistics revolve around this demographic’s monthly participation in social media. For example, more than half (62%) of those polled indicated that they visited social networks such as Facebook and MySpace, 60% read blogs (compared with 25% who wrote) and 79% watched online videos on YouTube and other media sites. Many tout text messaging as the next step in online campaigning, yet only 24% have sent or received a text message at least monthly regarding a political candidate.
  • And the Winner Is: Although the Internet clearly emerged as the medium of choice among this group, young voters also weighed in on the efforts of political parties to connect with them online. Overwhelmingly, 56% felt that the Democrats are doing a better job as compared with 13% for Republicans. When asked who they would vote for if the presidential election were held today, 49% chose Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, while 29% indicated they would support Republican Sen. John McCain – with 78% responding that they were certain to vote on election day or early/absentee.

These numbers should serve as a baseline for future campaigns, especially when targeting the growing Millennial generation. As they continue to age, their use of technology to communicate - and their ability to influence elections - will only increase. Of course, turnout has always been the key to winning elections and it still remains to be seen whether online activity will translate into actual votes in November.

Syndicate content