Humor is needed to attract young voters
Photo credit:Breitbart TV
I didn’t vote in the last election. Statistically speaking, you probably didn’t either.
The U.S. Census Bureau’s voting statistics for the year 2000 show that only 45 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds were registered to vote and only 32 percent actually voted in the election that put George W. Bush in office.
So, in a way, everything he has done is partly the voters’ fault because of our lack of action. We all have our reasons: “I don’t know enough about where the candidates stand on current issues,” “I am protesting this election because there’s no one worth voting for,” “My vote won’t make a difference” or “I had to study.”
Very few admit the truth: “I don’t care.”
Our age group is largely apathetic when it comes to public participation - not just for elections. Most Americans under 40 don’t follow the news or have more than a passing understanding of how our government works.
Ignorance isn’t bliss - it’s a recipe for manipulation at best and outright abuse at worst. These political figures are installing the laws that affect our lives, and not only do we not hold them accountable, we don’t even know their names.
They can afford to dismiss non-voters, especially in our demographic. It’s ironic, really - our age group is so desperately pursued by advertisers who want us to consume and give them money that we don’t realize we’re being completely ignored by those in actual positions of power.
Currently, our lack of public participation means politicians can take our tax dollars and direct our lives without worrying they will have to face the consequences of their actions because we use our spare time to read about Brangelina, Britney’s babies or LiLo’s overdose, instead of budget cuts to college loans and grants.
But wait a minute, which one impacts our lives more: Who our president is or Paris Hilton’s jail sentence? I’ll admit the latter is certainly more interesting, but before we answer that question ourselves, we should ask some of our fellow students who are fighting in Iraq right now.
Admittedly, we fickle youth might be more interested in politics if it were more interesting. That’s why this election is so important - and so different.
CNN’s innovative new presidential debate format, where citizens submit video inquiries to candidates via YouTube, changes the way that voters, both old and young, can be involved in and influence politics - but in a form the 18- to 24-year-old demographic is more familiar with.
The overly formal previous debates required citizens who wished to participate in national politics to be much more highly motivated and thus usually party-loyalists. By allowing everyday citizens to address the candidates, CNN compels politicians to face us on our terms, in our language. It makes for interesting questions and even more interesting answers, which are more direct and forthcoming. Most importantly we know what we want to watch, and the resulting questions are more creative, clever, thoughtful, humorous and relevant.
Humor is a key factor. There’s a reason Jon Stewart is popular - he makes something as boring and depressing as the nightly news and political posturing seem hilarious and, more importantly, worth watching.
By now you’ve probably heard of the Snowman’s global warming question for the Democratic debate in July. Pointed questions for the Republican debate on Nov. 28 included an 18-year-old Pennsylvania college student’s questions about reducing government spending to lessen the financial burden being placed on our generation, the ghost of Richard Nixon asked what limits should be placed on presidential power and who decides and enforces those limits, and an animated Bush ironically inquired if he had succeeded in his promise to restore dignity and honor to the White House. Questions such as these let us make a difference, involve us more in the national dialogue and allow the candidates themselves to move beyond the rhetoric and directly address what matters to us, perhaps with a little humor of their own.
If all presidential debates were funny (not the current unintentionally ridiculous parade of pomp and arrogance, but genuine humor) more people would watch them, more people would become inadvertently informed about current events and candidates’ plans and stances, and maybe, just maybe, more people - more of us 18- to 24-year-olds - would vote.
Read the original column online here.
