Home › Blogs › Sarah Burris's blog ›

Why We Lose (on campuses)

I hear from Democrats.com (the "Students and Young People" section), that those nasty College Republicans are at it again.

Morgan Wilkins, the intern hired by the Republican National Committee to win the hearts and minds of Michigan 20-somethings, is planning events that some may find odd. To others, they may be offensive.

One such idea is "Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day," in which a volunteer would play the part of an illegal immigrant and hide somewhere on campus while others try to find him. The winner would receive a prize.

Her other ideas include an event called "Fun with Guns," in which young Republicans would use a BB gun or paintball gun to shoot cardboard cut-outs of Democratic leaders such as Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)

The Democratic Response: Governor Dean sends a letter to Ken Mehlman, chairmain of the RNC, and (This is the really clever/inspiring part!) the letter is delivered by a bonified Young Person.

Strong. No. Strong to Very-Strong, as Dan would say.

Turning off the sarcasm, I'll just say that this is why we lose out to Republicans on college campuses. Republican programs - while we may find them at times racist or repugnant - are FUN. They exhibit a strong sense of humor and are in touch with the vibe of campus life. Our programs, by contrast, reveal college Dems to be no more than a collection of young Dukakis and Daschle's-in-training.

Hip to be square is not a solid strategy for beating Republicans on campus.

For bonus points, can you tell me what is wrong with this picture I pulled off the Democrats.com website? (answer after the jump)

Where are the students? Or the young people, for that matter. And who is that crazy guy in the lower left corner?

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • Magnoliacom
  • Newsvine
  • Furl
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Icerocket
September 15th, 2006 12:02am
Tags:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

So True

Submitted by Michael (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 09:26.

While College Repug events are racist, sexist, homophobic, they are energetic, creative and definitely appeal to their target audience. How the hell is it that the Dems have lost widespread support among young people? The Repugs have put huge resources in building its ranks among young people by offering trainings, workshops, grants for campus events etc. Their efforts dwarf anything that the Dems have come up with.

On the plus side, we have smart new groups like Generation Engage, Campus Progress and the League of Independent Voters. I especially appreciate Generation Engage's focus on the more than 50% of young people who did not go to college. We can bet the Repugs and build a stronger progressive movement, but we have to be innovative, passionate and engaging in our approach and actions.

True that

Submitted by Michael Connery on Fri, 2006-09-15 09:42.

I completely agree. In fact, if you are talking about funding, I wrote two posts about that here and here. If you are talking about infrastructure in general, well you've come to the right place. You can find any number of posts related to that topic here at Future Majority. It's basically the subject of the whole blog.

To get back to your comment, the amount of internships, fellowships, and networks for professional advancement - in all job categories from policy making to organizing - that Repuplicans can tap far outstrips what the Dems have. Even with the advent of new groups like those you mentioned plus the others that you didn't (National Hip Hop Political Convention, Roosevelt Instititution, Music for America, Cosmopolity, Young People For, The Nation Student Program - check out the sidebar).

Despite the growth of these new organzations, we're still getting beat hard because these orgs can't match the funding levels that the conservatives enjoy, and the coordination between these groups is still nascent at best.

I'd love to hear more about Generation Engage. As a nonpartisan group, I haven't paid too much attention to them, but tapping non-college young people is great. There's also a similar dearth of activity around community college attendees that needs to be remedied.

Gen Engage

Submitted by Alex UA on Fri, 2006-09-15 12:03.

It doesn't seem like Generation Engage is doing much engaging for this election. All I see on their site are events from June.

Close the Division

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 12:22.

The reason it seems the Republicans have the attention of young people is because they have learned to play on the frustration they are facing today. This seems to be evident by how they poke fun at the illegal immigration problem by having the "Catch and Illegal Immigrant Day". It's not racist to want people to return to their point of origin if they entered the country illegally. If the worst thing that happened to you is that someone made fun of you being here illegal...you got off easy.

People are frustrated by how long it has taken to bring attention to the matter and even more frustrated when these people now demand rights in a country they entered illegally in the first place. People are tired of seeing the government take care of large business and political parties that are worried more about the rights and entitlements of people who shouldn't be here in the first place than their own citizens. The Republicans may be dangling a carrot by saying what a lot of people want to hear about tough immigration...but it's working because people are listening.

I've never declared myself Democrat or Republican...I fall somewhere in the middle. If a Democratic politician wanted my attention...they would have to come closer to the middle and close the division. I know a lot of people who feel the same way...from one extreme to the other doesn't make any sense.

The Republicans have played the frustrations of most people against the Democrats by saying... see...they're not tough on anything. The reason for this is because the democrats are the fist to label people as racists, sexists, and homophobes...it sounds too whiney...learn to fight fire with fire...for every point they make...have a counterpoint that makes more sense. When Bill Clinton stood on the stage with Bush Sr...people saw a real contrast with someone that was going to take the country through another stage of growth rather than the status quo. Meaning...if you can't show something people view as better...they stick with the same ole thing...basically what you have now.

one note

Submitted by Josh Koenig on Mon, 2006-09-18 23:22.

Just to point out that in spite of all this hamfistedness from the party, support among youth is widespread and growing. Low point was 2000 when it was 45/45 and 10% for nader.

Clarification

Submitted by Michael Connery on Tue, 2006-09-19 09:05.

That is true.

To clarify my statements in this post and the comments, when I say that we're getting beat on campuses, I'm referring to Conservative edge in determining the narrative and projecting a youthful image of the group.

And when I say that young people are moving away from the Democrats, I'm talking specifically in terms of party identification, not the way they cast their ballots or perceive issues - all of which are trending towards the Democratic side.

c'mon

Submitted by Shai (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 11:06.

there's got to be, what, three, four young people in that photo. maybe 5? and i'm sure some of them feel "young at heart", right?

you are right that there's not much in the way of fun ways to engage young folks in politics. i remember when i was in college, the liberal groups somehow always ended up looking like squares on almost any issue; it was totally irritating. to the groups listed above, i would add, Billionaires for Bush, which i probably the closest our side comes to mimicking the conservative's approach of ridiculing the opposition.

the frustrating thing is that large swaths of the conservative movement are oh-so-ripe for ridicule; seems like it should be all too easy to throw campus events that make fun of some tenet or another of conservative dogma. for example, how about something like "Get Back in the Closet Day"? or how about having a mock job recruiting fair where all the jobs are for $5.15 an hour, or are about to be shipped overseas?

just some thoughts. but i'm sure we can do better.

Maybe its harsh

Submitted by Michael Connery on Fri, 2006-09-15 11:29.

Maybe I was a little harsh. But seriously, if you are going to have an area dedicated to atrracting and reporting on young people, that section of your website should at least reflect that. (I say this even as our design at FM is lacking in cultural cache. Yeah, I'm swimming in the irony).

Better targeting and what not - it's not just about voter file building, its about the entire way you operate.

Billionaires should definitely get added, and I will add them to our "Cultural Capitalizers" sidebar. Can't believe we left them off.

I posted this diary on Daily Kos, and a couple good ideas started to get batted around. Enough that this shouldn't be too hard to pull off. One idea was a Double-Dare style obstacle course called "Escape from New Orleans." Nothing spectacular has emerged yet, but a lot of the ideas are way better than what's going on now.

Though someone did bring up an excellent point in the discussion - the College Republicans are MUCH better funded as an organization. Giving College Dem chapters the means to be creative is just as important as having fresh ideas. Though, if you don't have the ideas, the money will just be wasted . . .

Speaking of this - anyone know how the College Dems get their funding? I assume some comes from University activities budgets, and some from the DNC. Are the Republicans just better funded because the RNC pulls through for them? Do Alumni have anything to do with teh cash advantage?

college dems vs. college republicans

Submitted by Shai (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 12:40.

I don't know much about the funding of college dems vs. that of college republicans, but I think we should be careful between drawing a parallel between the two groups.

On college campuses, there are usually a lot more liberals than conservatives, and therefore a lot more liberal groups than conservative groups. The result is that the College Republicans can reasonably be seen as representative of the conservative movement on campus, whereas College Democrats cannot. I don't know about you, but in my case, and in my day, College Dems were seen as the right-wing of the leftist groups on campus; they were considered the ladder-climbing corporate types, whereas the remaining liberal groups were on the whole more scruffy and radical. That may have changed, or it may have been unrepresentative, but from my interactions with Young Dems groups, I don't think it's changed much.

So it wouldn't necessarily be smart to just channel more money at the college dem. groups and expect them to become the leaders of the liberal movement on campus. For one thing they might not be willing to, for another thing they might not be able to, on account of distrust from other left-wing groups.

My personal take, and again it's based on my own experience more than any solid research, is that it would be better to support liberal college publications. They usually have their feet planted firmly in the midst of liberal student groups, since they often have friends in those groups and report on the goings on within them; and they also have their feet planted firmly in the real world, since by nature they produce and distribute publications and things like that. They are also a great source of high quality writers, left-minded business types, and so on.

Single Issue Groups, College Publications

Submitted by Michael Connery on Fri, 2006-09-15 12:52.

Shai,

I'm inclined to disagree with your first point, and agree with your second.

Yes, the college dems may (I don't want to stereotype) all be perceived as ladder climbing corporate lobbying shills in the making, but that's kinda my point. I'm sure they're all fun people in their Non-College Democrat lives. We need to overcome that image and/or that reality.

I don't support the other groups on college campuses because for the most part they are channels into the single-issue advocacy groups that have served the progressive movement so poorly over the last 20 years. As such, they are in an even worse position to take the lead for progressive campus politics because they can't see past their own issue. I think that these groups are even more of a dead end than the College Dems because they lead to counter productive activism. I don't want NARAL and the Sierra Club to get more recruits if they are going to use that manpower to endorse "liberal" Republicans over "conservative" Democrats based on a narrow definition of Progressive (ie their particular issue).

I don't expect better funding to automagically create a more cohesive progressive movement on campuses, but I think that building up a more engaging, socially networked version of the College Dems would be a big boon for progressive activism on campuses and could help raise the general Democratic image among college students.

As for publications, this is a great and needed piece of infrastructure. That's one of the main goals of Campus Progress. I wish they had more money to seed more publications every year.

single issue groups vs. college dems vs. publications

Submitted by Shai (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 17:12.

I think you have a good point as far as single issue groups go. These are fun to be a part of, but can be very counterproductive from a movement-building point of view.

Then again, so can the College Dems. After all, what is one of the key themes of this site? That engaging young voters has to be done through cultural venues, not just purely political ones. The college dems are, in large part, just as tone-deaf to this idea as the Dems are generally. Sure, individual College Dems may be party animals in their daily lives, but the way the groups tend to operate is overwhelmingly oriented around passing resolutions, supporting candidates, debating issues, etc.: they are college student versions of democratic committees. There's nothing wrong with that, but it certainly isn't conducive to engaging young voters in their daily lives, and I'm just not very convinced that College Dems can be convinced to change their m.o., or even that if they did it would necessarily be a good thing.

I'd add more but the fire alarm just went off in our office. :) Suffice it to say I think college publications would be a better bet for engaging students, where they already exist.

Exactly, but . . .

Submitted by Michael Connery on Tue, 2006-09-19 09:13.

Then again, so can the College Dems. After all, what is one of the key themes of this site? That engaging young voters has to be done through cultural venues, not just purely political ones.

Exactly. I guess my point is that something along the lines of the "minimum wage job fair" or "Escape from New Orleans/DoubleDare" challenge during Spring Fling is a cultural tactic. Culture doesn't just mean concerts adn beer fests (though I think we can all agree those are great). It's encompasses everythign that plays into where and how you live. Job fairs and festivals on the Quad are part of college life for a lot of folks, and I think these tactics could serve the College Dems well when competing with their better-funded counterparts.

This doesn't exclude Beer Festivals and concerts, or theater, or any other cultural activity - all of which should be embraced by the College Dems. It's just one more weapon in the arsenal . . .

It's the entertainment...

Submitted by Alex UA on Tue, 2006-09-19 10:13.

I'm not sure if "cultural" is the right term for what's effective here. I don't really think that most young people care if an activity is political or not. If it's entertaining/fun (or, in the case of young guys, if there are lots of young women there) then young people will attend/pay attention. If it's self righteous, overly wonky, or downright boring, then most of them will not attend/pay attention, at least not past the first encounter. The cultural aspect here is, IMO, the campus itself, which means that it's not even enough to focus on culturally based encounters, the outreach still must be effective in getting people's time, interest, and attention.

Bam!

Submitted by Josh Koenig on Tue, 2006-09-19 01:33.

I don't know about you, but in my case, and in my day, College Dems were seen as the right-wing of the leftist groups on campus; they were considered the ladder-climbing corporate types, whereas the remaining liberal groups were on the whole more scruffy and radical.

That was very much my experience lo those six years ago when I got my bachelors degree. I would add that I was also largely turned off by the scruffy/radical issue groups, though that had more to do with an excess of self-righteousness and my own past experience growing up with hippies way more scruffy, radical and fun than any group at NYU.

This idea of fun is a big deal. The YDA/College Dems are stereotyped as ladder-climbers and Rogets Rules geeks, and not without good reason. Issue activists are often humorless and shrill. It speaks to the way in which we young people ourselves learn about and frame the idea of political action that we can't seem to engage in this stuff without losing some critical elements of our humanity.

I think this also speaks, again, to the crippling lack of a large-scale paradigmatic goal or even point of view for the left. The old dream of an equitable and just society is faded, not in its worth but certainly in its vitality. It needs new color and life.

College Dems

Submitted by Alex UA on Tue, 2006-09-19 10:06.

Sure, College Dems have been stereotyped as ladder-climbing, random rules adhering, corporate/geeky types, and as you said, not without good reason. But, what's the cause of this?

The biggest problem is that nobody engages the CDs and lets them know that not only is it okay to do fun/entertaining outreach, it's also more effective. There are no big national orgs heading out to the colleges to talk with these young, idealistic, and motivated kids about effective outreach to their peers, and while myself and others are working with local CDs to do just this, it really needs to be done across the nation.

The reality is that people in College are impressionable, and many are searching for the best way to move forward with the careers they hope to attain. It is imperative for those of us who understand the value of peer based outreach, in comfortable/natural settings, to intervene and set these folks on a path to more effective outreach. These kids may be climbing a ladder, but to where is undetermined.

If the only people that these kids have contact with are the advisers and staff from big campaigns, we should expect more of the same. But- trust me when I say that these kids want, by and large, to be effective and to gain the respect/attention/votes of their peers. If someone can come in and show them a better/brighter/much more fun path to victory, then I promise you that they will follow and throw off the self-imposed chains of lame organizing/outreach.

Hmmm...

Submitted by Josh Koenig on Wed, 2006-09-20 21:47.

I see what you're saying, but that kind of support and inspiration is simply not going to come from above. We can kick and scream about it all we want, but it just ain't gonna happen. This kind of change and growth will come from within. The sooner people realize this and start doing it, the sooner we start changing things.

Nailed it on the Head

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2006-09-15 12:37.

Poking fun at the Republicans by having "minimum wage day" or "vote to give yourself a raise day"..have the "wheel of where you job is going to be exported" and have prizes...how much fun could they poke at Cheney by using the NRA...the material for these folks is limitless...but you have to add the solution in there as well so people can see a change that would occur if the matter way being handled differently.

How funny would it be to have the Bush to English dictionary as a prize...

Billonaires for Bush

Submitted by Alex UA on Tue, 2006-09-19 10:20.

I cannot stand protests. The useless screaming, the self righteous indignation, and the (IMO) false sense of action are all the exact opposite of how I believe we should be actively fighting for our causes.

But... I'll march with the Billionaires any time! I have never before seen a group of lefty protesters get a group of riot gear wearing police to laugh, cheer, and join in a protest, which I saw the billionaires do at the (IMO pointless) 2004 RNC protests in NYC. If you want to persuade people to join in your battle then you should try and use tactics like the Billionaires, John Stewart, and Steven Colbert.