Keep Pushing Back against Lazy Journalism; Howard Dean to Democratic Youth: 'Don't blow it'

A story I found published on a Philly Fox TV station's website irritated me for two reasons. The first involved lazy journalism. The second involved Howard Dean.

Leave it to a Fox News outlet to misrepresent (or leave out) facts about the youth vote. Not very surprising.

However, it is important. And it's something, as Mike regularly reminds us, that we need to be on top of from now through Election Day and its aftermath.

So, let's practice:

The enthusiasm of these young people seems so genuine- so real. But will it translate into a trip to the polls come November. There's reason for doubt.

In the 2000 presidential election, just 32% of eligible 18-to-24 year olds voted-- compared to better than fifty percent turnout for all eligible Americans.

Four years later, the youth vote was way up- to 42% but still well below the overall turnout of 55%.

I don't see a line anywhere that discusses the obstacles young people face in registering to vote and actually pulling the lever.

I also don't see any acknowledgement of a positive trend that extends past 2004. 2006 and the 2008 primaries come to mind.

And furthermore, we should not be holding youth accountable for other people outside the youth demographic deciding they want to participate in elections.

Turnout vs. Share: There's a sub-theme to be aware of here as well. There are two ways of measuring how a demographic performs during an election. These are turnout and share of the electorate, and the media has a hard time distinguishing between the two. Turnout means the hard number of people participating. In the IADP data above, 4,836 18-24 year olds caucused. That's the hard turnout number for that age demographic. You'll also notice that the data states that 18-24 year olds made up 3.9% of caucus goers in 2004. That's the share of the electorate for that age demographic. These two numbers can present very different pictures of demographic performance. The 2004 general election provides us with an excellent example.

In 2000, 18-29 year olds made up 17% of the electorate. That was their share of the electorate. In 2004, 18-29 year olds once again comprised 17% of the electorate. The "logical" conclusion is that the youth vote did not increase, and that was what the media reported on November 5th, 2004. Of course, this was wrong. If one examined the actual turnout numbers, it quickly became apparent that there was a huge increase in youth participation. In fact, 4.3 million more 18-29 year olds turned out in 2004 than did in 2000. That increase didn't appear in the share of the electorate data because turnout increased among all age demographics. In order to get a sense of what happened with young voters this year, we'll need to examine not only their share of the electorate, but also the hard turnout numbers. The media missed this in 2004, and the campaigns and youth advocates will all be checking this data to make sure that the campaigns and press don't make the same mistakes twice.

Yes, the article is the product of some local journalist who needed to meet a deadline and probably didn't have time to dig deeper. But that's where we need to come into play.

Let's turn to Howard Dean's comments about the importance of the youth vote.

"We need real change in this country, and young people aren't afraid of change," said Dean.

He urged this college crowd to get involved-- knock on doors, make phone calls and- most important of all- get out and vote.

"You are a great generation," Dean told the crowd, "It is your time. Don't blow it."

What a pep talk. I always love going into a big moment being reminded not to fail as if there's a decent chance that I very well could.

I think the reason this frustrates me so much is that Governor Dean, while having an improved track record with youth outreach compared to previous party leaders, didn't exactly embrace young Democrats when it came time to back up the rhetoric with actions during the convention. As Mike wrote in his posts from Denver a few weeks ago, there were a few younger speakers, but none that were placed into any national spotlight. The charter continues to refuse the youth caucus the same access at the convention that other caucuses within the party enjoy.

So the warning against "blow[ing] it" is not only ineffective; it's ironic. We're being told not to screw up when we haven't been given the injection of confidence to excel. We don't need reminders about how important this race is for young people. We need the party to show us they understand how important it is for young people.