Connect with us

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Young voters are going to be key to winning 2020

THE ATLANTA VOICE — In 2018, the youth vote increased in all 42 states for which youth voting data is available, according to the analysis by researchers at Tufts’ Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE). Based on this available data, which represents 94% of the American youth population, Tisch College researchers estimate 28.2% of young people nationwide voted in 2018 — more than double the national youth turnout in 2014.

Published

on

Campaigns go where the votes are, and it’s still true that older voters are more reliable voters, especially in midterm and off-year elections. But increasing youth participation can have a tremendous impact on elections at all levels. And research tells us that voting is habit-forming. Those who begin to vote early are more likely to vote often and throughout their lives. (Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA)

By Dan Glickman and Alan Solomont

Politics is in realignment. And perhaps the most underappreciated change is this: Based on recent research at Tufts University’s Tisch College of Civic Life, young voters, ages 18-29, played a significant role in the 2018 midterms and are poised to shape elections in 2020 and beyond.

For decades, this age bracket has turned out at lower rates than older voters, particularly in midterm elections. While experts have often attributed this to apathy, a complicated set of reasons may explain low turnout, including barriers to access, suppression, waning civic education and historic disadvantages. Despite these headwinds, 2018 marked a turning point.

In 2018, the youth vote increased in all 42 states for which youth voting data is available, according to the analysis by researchers at Tufts’ Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE). Based on this available data, which represents 94% of the American youth population, Tisch College researchers estimate 28.2% of young people nationwide voted in 2018 — more than double the national youth turnout in 2014.

Turnout among college students — an important subset of the youth vote — was even more impressive in 2018, at 40.3%. Research also showed that young voters preferred Democrat House candidates by 35 points, a massive margin that helped Democrats win back the House and far exceeded the highest gap of 27 points from 2008.

National statistics set the scene, but the stories on the ground are even more compelling.

Both parties have long tried to activate young voters, but with limited success. In 2018, however, Katie Porter, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine who won California’s 45th congressional district, hired an organizer specifically for campus outreach and campaigned on college campuses in the area.

In April 2018, Porter’s campaign had been listed in the Youth Electoral Significance Index, produced by Tisch College’s CIRCLE, as one of the top congressional races where young people could make the biggest impact, because of its youth population, prevalence of colleges, voter registration rates, historic turnout rates and turnout patterns where young people historically vote differently than older voters. Indeed, turnout in precincts on or near the UC Irvine campus surged in 2018, and outreach among young people has been credited as one reason for her victory.

Sen. Jon Tester’s win in Montana and Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s primary victory in the Massachusetts 7th District were also powered by youth turnout, according to research from CIRCLE.

Campaigns go where the votes are, and it’s still true that older voters are more reliable voters, especially in midterm and off-year elections. But increasing youth participation can have a tremendous impact on elections at all levels. And research tells us that voting is habit-forming. Those who begin to vote early are more likely to vote often and throughout their lives.

One election cycle isn’t a trend, but youth activists are certainly trendsetters when it comes to driving national conversations around public policy. On issues ranging from climate change to gun violence to voter suppression, young people are speaking up and encouraging their peers to register and vote, as we saw most recently during the climate strikes.

There is also increasing evidence that colleges and universities are getting involved. A recent report by Tisch College’s Institute for Democracy & Higher Education found that half of colleges that responded are using their college-voting data to guide campus conversations about engagement, and nearly 60% are using that data to mobilize voters.

College campuses have always been hotbeds of student political activism, but the rate of engagement from these voters in 2018 is historically large. This can be attributed, at least in part, to colleges and universities investing in the civic development of their students by embedding political and policy discussions in classroom learning, encouraging non-partisan voter registration and helping students confront consistent barriers to electoral participation (such as providing information about where and when to vote).

This is happening, for example, at James Madison University in Virginia; De Anza College, a community college in Cupertino, California; and the University of Texas at Austin.

As we head into 2020, both parties should focus more of their efforts on young voters. Their importance is often overlooked and dismissed by party leaders who assume their votes are “in the bag” for Democrats, or “gone forever” for Republicans.

Young people, who are less likely to respond to surveys, may be underrepresented in polls leading up to the election, especially if turnout remains high. Campaigns that base their outreach on these polls are taking a big risk if they ignore the importance of engaging with young people.

Both parties should get serious about courting this emerging part of the electorate, and that means seeking and valuing their input more and involving them in campaigns, or even encouraging them to run campaigns of their own.

Democrats shouldn’t take the current preference among young voters for granted. Young voters are suspicious of political parties, and their loyalty to either party is not particularly set. At least, not yet.

Republicans have a steep hill to climb when it comes to capturing more of the youth vote, but it is worth the effort. Donald Trump’s Republican Party has a strategy aimed at turning out a higher percentage of older voters, who tend to vote conservative. But there will be a Republican Party long after President Trump, and if that party hopes to compete, it will need to persuade younger voters to support its candidates.

Republicans may do particularly well if they focus on younger voters with libertarian tendencies. One possible reason, according to CIRCLE, is that young people are dissatisfied with the high amount of political polarization the United States has seen since the 2016 election.

If the GOP is committed to reaching new voters and trains its eye on this widely distributed and growing demographic, it may be forced to moderate its agenda and move more toward the middle of the political spectrum. Young voters in general hold more liberal views on nearly every issue than the current Trump-led Republican party ideology.

But as previously noted, young people are also not keen to identify with the Democratic party in particular. If they break from party dogma and adopt more moderate positions on issues such as climate change, the GOP might be surprised at the willingness of young voters to listen to their pitch for support. This may also put pressure on Democrats to take young people even more seriously and better respond to their demands for action on climate change and other issues.

However the data is interpreted by either party, the mere fact that this many young voters are engaging in the democratic process is a sign of future strength compared with the current national political frailty. With the passage of time, young Americans will inherit this country and its experiment in self-governance. To see them making their voices heard now gives us both hope.

This article originally appeared in The Atlanta Voice.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#NNPA BlackPress

Remembering George Floyd

Published

on

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

OP-ED: Oregon Bill Threatens the Future of Black Owned Newspapers and Community Journalism

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Nearly half of Oregon’s media outlets are now owned by national conglomerates with no lasting investment in local communities. According to an OPB analysis, Oregon has lost more than 90 news jobs (and counting) in the past five years. These were reporters, editors and photographers covering school boards, investigating corruption and telling community stories, until their jobs were cut by out-of-state corporations.

Published

on

By Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr.
President and CEO, National Newspaper Publishers Association

For decades, The Skanner newspaper in Portland, the Portland Observer, and the Portland Medium have served Portland, Oregon’s Black community and others with a vital purpose: to inform, uplift and empower. But legislation now moving through the Oregon Legislature threatens these community news institutions—and others like them.

As President and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA), which represents more than 255 Black-owned media outlets across the United States—including historic publications like The Skanner, Portland Observer, and the Portland Medium—l believe that some Oregon lawmakers would do more harm than good for local journalism and community-owned publications they are hoping to protect.

Oregon Senate Bill 686 would require large digital platforms such as Google and Meta to pay for linking to news content. The goal is to bring desperately needed support to local newsrooms. However, the approach, while well-intentioned, puts smaller, community-based publications at a future severe financial risk.

We need to ask – will these payments paid by tech companies benefit the journalists and outlets that need them most? Nearly half of Oregon’s media outlets are now owned by national conglomerates with no lasting investment in local communities. According to an OPB analysis, Oregon has lost more than 90 news jobs (and counting) in the past five years. These were reporters, editors, and photographers covering school boards, investigating corruption, and telling community stories, until their jobs were cut by out-of-state corporations.

Legislation that sends money to these national conglomerate owners—without the right safeguards to protect independent and community-based outlets—rewards the forces that caused this inequitable crisis in the first place. A just and inclusive policy must guarantee that support flows to the front lines of local journalism and not to the boardrooms of large national media corporations.

The Black Press exists to fill in the gaps left by larger newsrooms. Our reporters are trusted messengers. Our outlets serve as forums for civic engagement, accountability and cultural pride. We also increasingly rely on our digital platforms to reach our audiences, especially younger generations—where they are.

We are fervently asking Oregon lawmakers to take a step back and engage in meaningful dialogue with those most affected: community publishers, small and independent outlets and the readers we serve. The Skanner, The Portland Observer, and The Portland Medium do not have national corporate parents or large investors. And they, like many smaller, community-trusted outlets, rely on traffic from search engines and social media to boost advertising revenue, drive subscriptions, and raise awareness.

Let’s work together to build a better future for Black-owned newspapers and community journalism that is fair, local,l and representative of all Oregonians.

Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis Jr., President & CEO, National Newspaper Publishers Association

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

Hate and Chaos Rise in Trump’s America

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Tactics ranged from local policy manipulation to threats of violence. The SPLC documented bomb threats at 60 polling places in Georgia, traced to Russian email domains.

Published

on

By Stacy M. Brown
Black Press USA Senior National Correspondent

The Southern Poverty Law Center has identified 1,371 hate and antigovernment extremist groups operating across the United States in 2024. In its latest Year in Hate & Extremism report, the SPLC reveals how these groups are embedding themselves in politics and policymaking while targeting marginalized communities through intimidation, disinformation, and violence. “Extremists at all levels of government are using cruelty, chaos, and constant attacks on communities and our democracy to make us feel powerless,” said SPLC President Margaret Huang. The report outlines how hard-right groups aggressively targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives throughout 2024. Figures on the far right falsely framed DEI as a threat to white Americans, with some branding it a form of “white genocide.” After the collapse of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge, a former Utah legislator blamed the incident on DEI, posting “DEI = DIE.”

Tactics ranged from local policy manipulation to threats of violence. The SPLC documented bomb threats at 60 polling places in Georgia, traced to Russian email domains. Similar threats hit Jewish institutions and Planet Fitness locations after far-right social media accounts attacked them for trans-inclusive policies. Telegram, which SPLC describes as a hub for hate groups, helped extremists cross-recruit between neo-Nazi, QAnon, and white nationalist spaces. The platform’s lax moderation allowed groups like the Terrorgram Collective—designated terrorists by the U.S. State Department—to thrive. Militia movements were also reorganized, with 50 groups documented in 2024. Many, calling themselves “minutemen,” trained in paramilitary tactics while lobbying local governments for official recognition. These groups shared personnel and ideology with white nationalist organizations.

The manosphere continued to radicalize boys and young men. The Fresh & Fit podcast, now listed as a hate group, promoted misogyny while mocking and attacking Black women. Manosphere influencers used social media algorithms to drive youth toward male-supremacy content. Turning Point USA played a key role in pushing white nationalist rhetoric into mainstream politics. Its leader Charlie Kirk claimed native-born Americans are being replaced by immigrants, while the group advised on Project 2025 and organized Trump campaign events. “We know that these groups build their power by threatening violence, capturing political parties and government, and infesting the mainstream discourse with conspiracy theories,” said Rachel Carroll Rivas, interim director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “By exposing the players, tactics, and code words of the hard right, we hope to dismantle their mythology and inspire people to fight back.”

Click here for the full report or visit http://www.splcenter.org/resources/guides/year-hate-extremism-2024.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.