On Election Day, November 2012, how many young voters will 'come running back to Obama pretty quickly'?

Wesley, I think your analysis is sound.

I do still contend that Santorum would have a greater appeal than Romney to young people. The fact is *both* he and the ex-"Massachusetts Moderate" have staked out the most conservative ground this cycle. The difference, in my estimation, is that Santorum's blue-collar roots can better play to the middle-class. In other words, Santorum would vouch for populist causes more believably to voters than Romney. I gather we'll agree to disagree here.

Now to your question about the forecast for the 2012 campaign's 18-29 get-out-the-vote efforts. It's not impossible, even if it appears unlikely today, that young people will best their '08 performance at the ballot box. Yes, a more realistic bet is that millennials will vote at a relatively similar rate to that of 2008.

Conventional wisdom, amid continued economic hardship, is that youth turnout could slide from the 2008 presidential campaign. It's true: It will be more challenging to entice economically-strapped young people to the polls.

But if President Obama's re-election message connects with the pulse of America's youth and their economic condition, then the economy as a central focus could become a plus - not a minus - for unprecedented youth turnout. Let's not forget that young people still came out in record numbers as the financial markets crashed...and twentysomething joblessness and debt were spiraling out of control.

On The Tonight Show, HBO's political satirist Bill Maher may have explained why young people will still rally around Obama. Speaking on behalf of liberals (and his youth base), Maher said: "I don't think we ever stopped liking him. There's nothing that focuses the mind like this last year of seeing the Republicans. You see these people, and you run back to his arms pretty quickly."



Young voters may need to take pride in a new conviction in order to vote for Obama again en masse. With the election of the first black president, a promise of a post-racist or racial politics was realized. Now, will young people double-down on Obama for the promise of transformational politics that they believe he still embodies?

Wesley, what deeper aspiration may young people see in President Obama or his agenda that could motivate them to vote at a 2008 rate?

Is mobilization of the youth vote in 2012 campaign an unrealistic hope?

Rick Santorum is no populist.

In fact, of the remaining GOP hopefuls, he is the only one who has no chance of moderating his stances and claiming the populist mantle.

Santorum's "true conservative" agenda is, in reality, a social issues agenda. He's spent more time on the campaign trail arguing that he's "more pro-life" than Ron Paul (a guy who delivers babies for a living) then he has talking about the national debt. And, at the end of the day, Santorum is the least qualified person to be discussing the economy.

The GOP must stick to the economy to top Obama, and an ousted former senator with no private sector experience isn't' the person to do that.

And as much as I'd love to believe that young voters have eagerly embraced the rhetoric that calls for paying down the national debt and that urges fiscal responsibility — we've been down this road before.

Remember when the GOP stormed into power during the mid-90s, promising fiscal responsibility and paying down the national debt? I do, a squirrely house whip named Gingrich was leading the charge.

Two decades later, our financial outlook is no better.

But all of that is besides the point. We can debate which issues would be best for Republicans to court young voters until we're blue in the face, but the fact remains: the candidates couldn't care less.

As political analyst Michael Barone opined in the Detroit News this week, Romney and the other GOP hopefuls haven't been speaking to young voters directly yet. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Meanwhile, Cheryl Russel writes for The New Republic that those looking for strong youth turnout shouldn't hold their breath.

It's true that the economy has shown signs of recovery in the past few months. The number of jobs is growing, and unemployment is down. But the nine months between now and Election Day are not enough to gestate a generation of youth and turn them into voting adults. It takes years to catch up. Studies show that those who graduate from college into a bad economy experience long-term wage losses— particularly after being underemployed— with lower earnings even six years after recovery. Those wage losses will likely continue to have an effect on marriage and homeownership rates, which will in turn have an effect on voter turnout.

It's a grim picture, and it almost (but not quite) guarantees that 18-to-29-year-olds will be less likely to vote in 2012 than in 2008. This is bad news for Obama, who will need the youth vote to win in November. It doesn't mean, of course, that he shouldn't try to recreate some of the enthusiasm he sparked among young voters in 2008— it just means he will be facing an uphill battle.

So is it that cut and dry? Will the nation's bleak economic factors mean youth turnout in 2012 will suffer?

Will GOP embrace 99% to capture youth vote - and sweep Obama out of office?

Assuming that the Republicans remain mum on overhauling education policy (addressing those most pressing higher ed concerns to college students and recent graduates), the GOP could potentially connect with young people on the national deficit issue.

The deficit issue, in the abstract, resonates with young voters because they realize the magnitude of the debt we are inheriting. Many politically thoughtful young people viewed President Obama's inaction on the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission's recommendations as a missed opportunity. 

Still, in my estimation, the fight for the soul of America will be a far more personal, bread and butter, populist one. In this political climate, the economic plight and pocketbooks of individual citizens rival the nation's debt clock. And heart, I am convinced, trumps numbers. (As I argued last year on RealClearPolitics, that's not so different from every presidential contest since 1960.)

At some point soon, the Republicans will recognize that in order to ouster President Obama, they will have to wage a campaign on behalf of the 99%. Nate Silver of the New York Times agrees with us.

So beyond charting a populist course, Republicans can also appeal to young people's civic obligations...without patronizing them. Even though it's likely not in their best interest if youth turnout increases this fall, the GOP will accomplish two things by promoting youth engagement and student voting. They will sway a handful of voters who are persuaded by their outreach, and *more important* they will modernize the party to be more viable beyond this cycle.

Wesley: Among the remaining Republican candidates, is Santorum the only one could effectively claim the populist mantle?

Infighting and vitriol will sink GOP's prospects with youth

If there is one thing I respect most about millennial voters it's this: They hate overly partisan politics and violent political rhetoric.

We saw this in the backlash to past candidates such as Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, and this distaste for vitriol and affinity for post-partisan discussing, in many ways, explains President Obama's popularity among young people.

The GOP must also keep this election away from social issues. As we've chronicled before, young voters have little appetite for returning to debates over abortion, gay marriage and Terri Shaivo (which did, shockingly enough, come up in a debate during the run-up to the Florida primary).

And, whether conservative voters in states such as South Carolina like it or not, the tide has turned on once-pivotal issues such as gay marriage — we is seemingly being ok-ed by voters in a new state each week.

That ban on social issue campaigning also extends to birth control, a debate which has been ramped up of late as GOP contenders, led by Newt Gingrich, has argued that President Obama is waging a "war on the Catholic church" because provisions in his healthcare plan require insurance providers to cover the cost of contraceptives.

While using a "war of the Catholic church" sounds nice in theory, new polling shows that the majority of Americans, 66%, support requiring employers and insurance providers to cover contraceptives.

To avoid disenfranchising young voters, the GOP must avoid sexually-charged issues, which they have historically been and continue to be on the wrong side of. So Alexander, if not sex (birth control, gay marriage, etc) what issues should the GOP talk about (also excluding college tuition, which we've written about at length) in order to win young votes?

Obama Zombies? No. Raw economic deal, not liberal politics, stack up against welfare of America's young people.

I am not going to deviate too far from my Paul analysis to date. I still contend that, in the end, Paul is more of a factor in the general election as an enthusiastic insurgent third party candidate. That is not to understate the fact that the candidate does, as you report, continue to finish with delegates in the contests of most states. But in November, youth turnout would be more significant, in all ideological camps, if Paul is a third-party candidate than if he's resigned to non-candidate status. 

I'd like to draw attention, as we take a breath of fresh air amid this rollicking nominating process, to a few recent articles concerning the youth vote that caught my attention. First, Politico reporter Jennifer Epstein smartly asks if the Obama campaign will recapture the zest with young people from the 2008 presidential cycle.
 
"The Obama cultural phenomenon four years ago lit up the youth vote like no campaign before." "His team,” she writes, "is looking to revive the cool appeal—and reignite the young voters who’ve strayed."

Assuming Obama is unable to forge a new popular appeal to young people - Wes, you and I have stressed the message of economic populism must be central to such a mission - there is a different question, one Republican pollster Katie LaPotin probes at Campaigns & Elections.

In order to win any young people, will Republicans have to speak up, with real care, on the seminal economic issues to college-aged voters. LaPotin is on the money:

Still, the Occupy movement was an attempt by America's youth to vent their frustrations with the status quo. Hundreds of thousands of protestors camped out in city parks and other public places, living off donated food and proclaiming that they are a part of the "99 percent" of Americans struggling to make ends meet today. Despite their frustrations, these voters are unlikely to vote Republican in November.

Part of this has to deal with younger voters’ positions on social and environmental issues, but much of it has to do with the constant squabbling and the lack of outreach by this year's GOP presidential contenders.

Case in point: Twenty-eight year old Human Events editor on FOX News promoting his book on the "Obama Zombies," the generation of Obama supporters whom he pejoratively badmouths. The substance of his attack is ad hominem: In his world, young people are plainly stupid for sympathizing with progressive ideals.

Such an attitude will only backfire for conservatives, only widening their divide with financially-strapped millennials in the workforce or in the college. Look no further than today's San Jose Mercury News story about a 22 year-old "lifer at work," which summarizes today's economic quandary for young people.

Finding your calling in life that soon isn't supposed to happen Generation Y. Children of baby boomers or older members of Generation X, they are 50 million strong and entering the job force at the worst time. Two-thirds of young workers under age 30 cannot pay their bills. One in three have returned home to live with mom and dad. A confounding, evolving global economy will press them to change jobs or careers more than once, so it's no surprise that polls show the Y-sters resent being held back.

Obviously, the Zombie writer does not speak for the GOP or all conservatives. But he demonstrates little interest in how moneyed interests, and their entrenchment in the two-party political system, have denied Gen Y even a semblance of economic peace. Moreover, he reflects a dangerously anti-populist message that would doom a GOP candidacy come the fall.  

So, Wesley, I must ask: What should Republicans avoid at all cost (policy and rhetoric-wise) if they want to leave open what appears the ever shrinking prospect of connecting with the youth vote?

Paul's northern hope: Does the youth favorite finally win a state?

Even though the major outlets have called Maine for GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney, apparently no one has told the Ron Paul camp.

The Texas congressman gave an exuberant speech last night, in which he acknowledged his second place finish - terming it a "virtual tie" with Romney" - and arguing that even if the final totals have him trailing Romney that he believes his delegate strategy is working.

As usual, Paul is the most understated of his supporters.

His campaign today contested the Romney victory, and Maine Republicans very well may have to reverse their declaration of Romney's victory once all of the votes are counted. Call it Iowa 2.0.

The reason is that Washington County, a Paul stronghold, the caucus was postponed until Feb. 18 due to an expected snowstorm. Top GOP leaders in Maine have vowed to not count those votes in the final total, but there is no way Paul devotees are going to let the state write off 16% of the electorate in what is currently a 200-vote victory for Romney.

Meanwhile, pundits continue to argue that Paul's caucus strategy is failing because he hasn't been earning first place finishes. Of course they are — because they don't understand how the delegate process works.

Many of the caucus states — Maine and Minnesota included – use a "non-binding" system, meaning that delegates are not required to cast their convention vote based on the popular vote of their county. If Paul is able to amass the most volunteers to go to the convention on his behalf, it's just as good as having won the popular vote.

As a top Paul advisor told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow earlier this week:

We think we've won in Iowa, we won in Minnesota, we won in Colorado, and Missouri is yet to be seen. And we think we probably won in Nevada

And in even more good news for Paul, one of the more recent national polls from Reuters placed him in second place nationally, drawing 21% of GOP support — the highest level of support Paul has ever gotten in a national poll.

Alexander, you've suggested that Paul has hit his glass ceiling and that his voter base will be incapable of expansion. But could his Maine finish and his national poll surge (documented by Reuters) prove the opposite?