By Ejaz
S. Haque (Age 22)
(2015
graduate of chemical engineering -
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Fall is in full swing. If you have been
anywhere near a television over the last few months, you are aware that
election coverage has arrived. For those of you ages 18 to 21, you may have
been looking forward to this time of the year for months; after all, 2016 marks
the first time in your lives you will be able to participate in a presidential
election, one of the most important rights afforded to you by American law.
Statistically, however, it is much more
likely that you are indifferent to this new power and have no plans of putting
it to use at all.
Or don’t, but at least now you have the choice.
Such a sweeping generalization may
justifiably raise some eyebrows among discerning readers, as to some it may
seem as though younger generations are more active in politics than ever
before. Even if this were the case, the truth is that there is still much
progress to be made according to voting and registration data obtained by the
United States Census Bureau. Of the 5146 Americans aged 18 to 24 polled just
last year, more than half (2924) reported that they did not vote in the
November 2014 election. Extrapolating this data to a nationwide scale (and,
yes, arguably taking some statistical liberty in doing so), this means that the
number of young adults that could be expected not to vote in the upcoming
election is approximately 3 million – in other words, enough people to swing
the outcome of the 2004 presidential election.
And we wonder why we don’t feel represented enough in
national politics.
This calculation fails to account for those who
did not respond regarding their registration status, meaning it is likely that
the reality is even worse than it seems. Despite government approval reaching all-time
lows in recent years, the numbers show that we as a demographic are not yet
incensed enough to take meaningful action. In addition to the sheer
abstruseness of today’s political discourse, the corruption and often-spotty
personal and professional histories of major party candidates explains to some
extent why many see the election process as a farce. “Why even bother voting
when every candidate sucks?” or “what’s the point when they can just buy their
way into office anyway?” one might ask.
The answer is simple and we've all heard it
before: your vote is your voice. Yet the polls show that many continue to
question whether or not their single vote is truly impactful. Sure, non-voters
may have been able to swing the 2004 election, but only in one of the closest
presidential races of all time, and only if they had voted unanimously in favor
of the Democratic Party. With such conditions being quite rare and nearly
impossible to replicate, our ballots can feel meaningless, lost in the vast sea
of votes that ultimately do nothing to dictate the outcome of large-scale
elections. However, the misguidedness of this perspective has been illustrated numerous
times by the profound yet undeniable impact Millennials make on a national
level.
We may not be as good as we think we are, but we’re not as
bad as others think either.
Among the biggest news stories of 2012 was
the shooting of Florida teen Trayvon Martin. The mass media coverage,
prosecution, and subsequent acquittal of shooter George Zimmerman contributed
to making the event one of the most important social justice struggles of the
decade. Yet without the contributions of young adults across the nation, it
could have remained a local story, swept under the rug and forgotten within
weeks.
In the aftermath of the shooting, Washington
D.C. resident Kevin Cunningham, unsatisfied with the leniency of Sanford police
on Zimmerman, took to online petition platform change.org to call for Zimmerman’s arrest. Within days, the
petition had made waves through social media, accumulating thousands of
signatures. Soon after control of the petition was transferred to Martin’s
parents, the “Justice for Trayvon” campaign had developed into a full-scale
protest movement. National media coverage was heightened in response,
pressuring police to finally arrest and persecute Zimmerman, leading to the
long-awaited trial many thought would be impossible given the strong pushback
from self-defense apologists. Though Zimmerman was eventually acquitted, the
impact of the internet and social media on the resolution of the case cannot be
denied. The change.org campaign was fueled solely by action from its backers
and gained national recognition due to its overwhelming support. Had these
backers (hundreds of thousands of whom were among the 18 to 24 age bracket)
instead failed to take action as they did in the 2014 elections, the prospect
of prosecuting Zimmerman may have been dead on arrival.
It’s hard for anyone to ignore 2.3 million messages in
their inbox.
This is not to say that all (or even most)
Trayvon supporters abstained from voting, nor does it prove the value of the
individual ballot. However, it is a clear demonstration of the power of the
internet and the collective interests of the young adults that dominate the
platform.
Why is it that current presidential
candidates seem lacking in many respects to the younger generations?
Superficiality, partisan agendas, flip-flopping, and many other qualities
contribute to the disconnect between older politicians and younger constituents.
And yet, if we are aware that these problems exist, why do they continue to
plague elections at all levels, year in and year out? Voter apathy catalyzes
this self-fulfilling prophecy: if young adults have no interest in voting,
candidates are no longer motivated to adopt policies that favor young adults, giving
them no reason to vote in the first place.
The solution to this problem is easier said
than implemented. Campaigns such as ‘Rock the Vote’ and ‘Bite the Ballot’ have
the right intentions, but how many of us have really fostered a vested interest
in politics since learning about them? Advertising is rarely effective in
swaying any demographic in taking notice and performing deeper research on
their own, as pro-voting campaigns inherently do. An audience that is initially
resistant to listening will be much less likely to internalize a message than
one that came looking on its own. The key to breaking this cycle is to work with
young voters on their own territory and as the Trayvon Martin case shows, the
internet and social media are ideally suited platforms to do this.
When former backup center and certified scrub Hasheem
Thabeet
has 4 times as many followers as you, you aren’t getting the job done.
has 4 times as many followers as you, you aren’t getting the job done.
Transparency between government officials,
the media, and the public is greater than ever – or at least has the potential
to be – due to the open nature of the internet. Though their use of designated
social media representatives raises questions concerning their candidness,
politicians have nevertheless made a great leap forward in public relations by embracing
these platforms. From Barack Obama’s digital town hall meeting on Reddit’s AMA forum
to the use of Twitter as a channel of direct contact with constituents, it is
clear that social media is the most powerful medium of communication between
the electorate and the candidates.
Barack Obama’s AMA is the 19th most popular
post on Reddit of all time.
Young adults do care!
The benefit of this model for American
citizens is that direct communication begets direct accountability. Imagine that
the 18 to 24 year olds who did not vote in the 2014 elections were all
dedicated followers of presidential hopeful Donald Trump on Twitter. Real-time
updates make it easy for followers to keep up-to-date on Trump-related events
and any changes in his politics. Imagine now that at a rally next week, Trump rescinded
his proposal for government spending reform and decreased taxation on the
middle class. You would expect his followers, college students or recent
graduates that would benefit from this plan, to be outraged.
This kind of flip-flopping has almost become
commonplace as candidates take advantage of the difficulty in keeping track of
every promise made over the course of a presidential campaign. However, due to
the nature of social media and cloud-based platforms, identifying this behavior
is so simple that hypocrisy is now called out on a daily basis. Even without
abandoning his promises, Trump could receive backlash from his followers for
adopting new policies that support older citizens (e.g., social security) at
the expense of younger ones. Whereas politicians have commonly justified
tailoring their campaigns exclusively to the desires of an older crowd, a politically-active
millennial generation could easily pressure them into giving more consideration
to a wider audience. Given that our earlier estimate of the number of 18 to 24
year olds in this country approximates the population of Iowa, this demographic
would certainly carry weight.
It is important to remember, however, that
all of the above is contingent upon an internal desire to take action. Voting
campaigns may motivate kids to start thinking about the idea of voting, but it
is on the individuals themselves to perform research and cultivate an interest
on their own. The tools we have before us in the internet and social media
should convince us that we can make a difference, and a big one at that in the
upcoming election. There can be no excuse for not voicing our opinions. It is
when we are dissatisfied with the status quo that we must take action the most;
failing to do so only serves to perpetuate it. Whenever you feel like your vote
means nothing in the face of a government that wields more power than you ever
could, remember that your vote is the ultimate check on every politician that
represents you, a check they have no ability to dispute. When we millennials truly
appreciate this – when we no longer ask “should I bother using this power?” and
instead ask “how can I best put it to use?” – we can shape the political
landscape in ways no expert can foresee.
