Pundits were
quick to point out that the percentage of
Millennial voters (those 29 and younger) in
the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial
elections last week were roughly half of
what they were in 2008. This led the voice
of what passes for wisdom inside the
Beltway, Charlie Cook, to proclaim, "we knew
that young and minority voters who had never
cast a ballot before they did for Barack
Obama last year were very unlikely to show
up at the polls this year or next."
His
extrapolation of two state's unique odd
year election results into a guaranteed
outcome in the 2010 general election is
breathtaking for what it reveals about
Cook's own biases and those of his peers.
It's reminiscent of James Carville's
comments prior to Barack Obama's 2008
primary triumph that "we have a word in
politics for those who are counting on the
youth vote to win. We call them losers." But
at least Carville saw the light after
looking at the surge in young voters for
Democrats in 2008 and recognizing that a new
generation, with different attitudes toward
political participation than the preceding
generation, Generation X, had arrived in
the American electorate.
Unfortunately,
too many of those operating as if the world
didn't change in 2008 are Democrats, whose
misreading of last week's results could cost
the party dearly in 2010. The two
gubernatorial losses cannot simply be
dismissed, as the White House tried to do,
as merely a reflection of circumstances
unique to New Jersey and Virginia, unrelated
to national campaign strategy. In reality,
the 2009 election returns once again
demonstrated the importance of aligning all
four M's of political campaigns--Messenger,
Message, Media and Money-with Millennial
Generation attitudes and behavior if any
campaign, Democrat or Republican, hopes to
be as successful in winning the votes of
young people as Barack Obama was in 2008.
A year ago
Obama won 60% of the vote in Virginia among
18-29 year-olds. In New Jersey his margin
was even greater, 67%. Even after taking
into account Obama's overwhelming support
among minorities and considering only white
Millennials, the appeal of this particular
messenger to this cohort is clear.
Nationally, Obama won 54% of all white
Millennial Generation voters. He won 42% of
white Millennials in Virginia, reflecting
that Southern state's relatively
conservative views. But even this was well
above the support Obama received from older
white voters. He also carried 58% of New
Jersey white Millennials, reflecting the
overall partisan and ideological orientation
of that state.
Neither
Democratic gubernatorial candidate in last
week's election had a biography that matched
the bi-racial, community organizer, outsider
image of the President. Jon Corzine's Wall
Street riches and political insider image
hardly matches the selfless, socially
concerned profile of Obama. Corzine's lesser
appeal to Millennials is partially a
reflection of that difference. While
Millennials were the only generational
cohort to prefer Corzine over the Republican
winner, Chris Christie, Corzine's support
fell to 57% among all Millennials and 42%
among white Millennials. Coupled with the
decline in the Millennial Generation's
contribution to the electorate, from 17% to
9%, even this level of support wasn't enough
to re-elect Corzine.
Creigh Deeds'
bio was even less like Obama's, with a
political career focused on playing the
inside game in the State Capitol and
appealing to the good old boys in rural
Virginia. This was one reason he became one
of the first Democrats to actually lose the
Millennial vote to a Republican, 44% for
Deeds vs. 54% for McDonnell. And despite his
focus on attempting to win over more
conservative Democrats, Deeds actually lost
white Millennials to McDonnell by a 2:1
margin.
But the
President's appeal to Millennials went
beyond his unique personal qualities. He
also had a message that helped engage and
motivate young people from its overall theme
of change to his specific call to help young
people pay for college by expanding
opportunities to serve their community. By
contrast, Corzine's record contained nothing
that was particularly appealing to
Millennials. And Deeds' attempt to run a
campaign based on social issues ran directly
counter to the Millennial Generation's
greater interest in pressing economic issues
like jobs. McDonnell's campaign, by contrast
was focused like a laser, as President Bill
Clinton used to say, on the state's need to
improve economic opportunity for all of its
citizens.
Still, having
the right messenger and message will not win
over Millennials unless a campaign reaches
out to them using the media to which they
pay attention, expending sufficient
resources to break through the daily chatter
that is also a part of the generation's
unique behavior. Corzine certainly spent
plenty of his personal money on his
campaign, but most of that money was devoted
to television commercials, the least
effective way to reach Millennials. By
contrast, in Virginia, McDonnell used the
Internet extensively, including a major
Google ad buy late in the campaign, to make
sure his message of social issue moderation
and economic opportunity was heard by
Millennials.
There are many
things that are different about this newest
generation of Americans. At this point,
Millennials identify as Democrats by nearly
2:1 and are the first generation in forty
years to contain more self-perceived
liberals than conservatives. Millennials are
positioned to make the Democrats the
majority party for decades. But Democrats
cannot take them for granted because in one
very fundamental way Millennials are no
different than any older generation.
Like all
voters, Millennials are more likely to
participate in elections and vote for
candidates who appeal to their concerns with
a convincing and credible message that is
heard often enough to make an impact.
Democrats should take a lesson from their
President's successful campaign in 2008 that
used that formula to win two out of three
Millennial votes. Or, they could spend some
more time analyzing and explaining away last
week's two gubernatorial defeats only to
discover that Republicans have already
completed their analysis and are ready to
launch a campaign with just the right four
M's to appeal to Millennials and give the
GOP victory in 2010.
