youth

Sarah Burris of Future Majority beats me to the punch in rebutting a blog post about a “Rising Tide of the GOP Youth,” as described by The Weekly Standard’s Rachel Hoff. Burris writes:

First, while Rachel is right to congratulate McDonnell for his campaign’s youth outreach, I hardly think it has anything to do with young voters having gone to the GOP…

This doesn’t mean young voters have gone GOP, it means that when you put forth the effort to get young voters, you speak to their issues, and you get out the vote you get a good result.

I wish I felt comfortable celebrating the fact that the 2009 elections meant young voters were turning toward the GOP, but unfortunately I just don’t buy it. Hoff suggests that “18-29 year olds in Virginia voted for Bob McDonnell over the Democrat 54% to 44%” could indicate a new trend, but as Burris notes, in Virginia there was not a “strong Democrat at the top of the ticket but…[there was] a strong Republican.” The unfortunate fact is that one Republican candidate’s successful effort in winning the youth vote does not indicate any sort of trend for future elections (for a counterargument, just look to New Jersey, where 57% of young voters voted for Corzine).

And while Hoff notes that “turnout among 18-29 year olds was 19% in New Jersey and only 17% in Virginia,” an “alarmingly low” turnout, it would be a huge mistake for the GOP to write off the youth vote based upon these numbers. As I have written previously, what’s at stake here is that the Republican Party stands to lose a generation of voters to the Democratic Party, potentially for life. Although Chairman Steele has taken some major efforts to reform the Republican National Committee, such as a huge push to modernize the RNC’s new media efforts, there still has not been a substantial push by Steele’s RNC to win over young voters.

In the end, both Burris and Hoff agree that making a real, authentic effort to earn the votes of young voters will result in young voter turnout. The Republican Party still has time left to turn the tide and prevent many of today’s young voters from becoming lifelong Democrats; however, the clock is ticking and time is running out. Major congratulations are due to the McDonnell campaign and their young voter outreach, but there is no time to pat ourselves on the back. Both the RNC and Republican candidates must follow Bob McDonnell’s lead and find unique new ways to reach out to and ultimately win over young voters.

After the 2002 and 2004 elections, Republicans celebrated electoral victories that many thought would put them in the position to maintain a long-term majority. In turn, Democrats pushed the panic button and began looking for ways to turn things around. Likewise, after 2006 and 2008, it was the opposite effect, with Democrats claiming a permanent majority, and Republicans looking to rebuild.

Once again, the political climate seems to be changing, this time in favor of Republicans. President Obama’s approval ratings are continuing to trend significantly downward, with the latest Rasmussen Poll even suggesting that the majority of Americans disapprove. More voters believe that the economic stimulus plan has hurt the economy than helped it. Support for the public health option continues to tumble, too.

Looking at these trends and others, Patrick Ruffini writes that a 2010 blowout is quite possible, and I really don’t disagree at all. However, I wanted to offer a word of caution in the case Republicans win (or win big) in 2010, despite the fact that I recently Tweeted the following:

No more “[Name] for President” group invites on Facebook, please. Let’s focus on winning in 2010 first and worry about 2012 after!

Such a victory in 2010 will by no means indicate that things are better for Republicans long-term. Rather, it would be the result of a number of fortunate circumstances. Just see Ruffini’s suggestions as to why Republicans should prepared for a blow out:

• The horrendous 2006 and 2008 cycles have depressed Republican totals in Congress to far below the historical mean. Though the fact that there were two successive 20+ seat losses in the House and 5+ seat losses in the Senate in the House is historically unique, collectively they equal one 1980 or 1994-style wipeout — after which Democrats finally began to recover.
• The unique confluence of youth and African American turnout for Obama padded vote totals for Congressional Democrats by about 4 points — and in a midterm — I’m sorry — those votes won’t be there. We saw this pretty clearly in the Georgia Senate runoff. In 2012, however, those voters might be back — making 2010 an opportune moment for a promising Congressional challenger to gain a foothold.
• The Democrats are now clearly responsible for everything, and trying to blame Bush and the GOP wears thinner and thinner by the day. Even if the economy recovers somewhat, and with massive job losses still on the horizon, I don’t see people feeling that recovery, let’s remember that the economy was in a clear recovery by 1994 but that didn’t help Clinton and Democrats.

The bottom line — and what Republicans cannot forget, even with a huge win in 2010 — is that these fortunate circumstances are not something around which you can build a sustainable majority. Voters aren’t always going to be ticked about the economy, the Democrats won’t always have a filibuster-proof majority, and although the “unique confluence of youth and African American turnout” may not be there in 2010, as Ruffini notes, “in 2012 … those voters might be back”. And as I’ve been writing about lately, the RNC hasn’t done a darn thing to try to win over young voters while the DNC continues to find new ways to earn their support. While these voters may not show up in 2010, in 10-15 years they will no longer be youth voters — instead, they will represent the kind of middle-aged voters that Republicans will need to turn out, both during Presidential election years and during mid-term and other off years.

So while there are many reasons to be excited about the prospects of 2010, the political climate will likely change again from 2010 to 2012, as it often does.  Although focusing on the short-term may end in positive results in 2010, Republicans still must think long-term about building a sustainable majority. Otherwise, the GOP may soon again face another 2006 or 2008 — but the next time, it may be much harder to turn around.

While the RNC continues to stand pat instead of giving young voters a legitimate role in the future of the Party — or even simply establishing its own Young Voter Outreach Arm to compete with the Democratic National Committee’s Youth Council — the Democrats continue to find new and innovative ways to involve young voters in the Democratic Party.

Michael Connery at Future Majority notes that the DNC Youth Council, along with College Democrats, is holding a joint fundraiser, presumably to “show the party committees that young people can help [Democrats] raise money.” You can view the entire event for the “Celebrating Youth Fundraiser” on Facebook, but the highlight is this:

Come meet Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH), DNC Vice Chair Raymond Buckley, DNC Political Director Clyde Williams, Organizing for America Political Director Addisu Demissie, former Obama for America Youth Vote Director Leigh Arsenault, and young staffers from the Obama administration to learn about the amazing career opportunities available in Democratic politics.

For a party that sits squarely in the filibuster-less minority status, I would think that the RNC would be eager to find innovative ways like this to involve young voters and recruit new young faces to help rebuild the party.

After all, when Michael Steele took over as Chairman of the RNC, we were promised that things would change. So when will the RNC start fighting to win young voters and to involve new leaders in the party’s future?

Two days ago, I wrote that we must give young voters a legitimate role in the future of the Republican Party. The clock is ticking for these crucial changes to take place. Recognizing this, our team of young Republicans at NextGenGOP and I have launched the Petition for Our Future. Now you can join the many voices asking Chairman Steele to expand the role of young voters in the GOP by signing the petition! Please sign the petition and encourage your friends to do the same!

We also need your help in spreading the word about the petition. In the next week, we will be adding a page that lists our featured endorsers. This page will show your name and link back to your website! To become a featured endorser, all you need to do is write a blog post about the petition, linking back to the petition here. Once you’ve done so, drop me an e-mail with a link to your blog post by going to my online business card.

We have a great opportunity to encourage Chairman Steele and the Republican National Committee to act now and win back young voters. Please sign the petition, help spread the word, and be a part of this vitally important cause!

Over at FutureMajority.com, a left-of-center blog that "covers the involvement of young voters in progressive politics," Michael Connery brings attention to this:

Want to be a member of the Democratic National Committee? The DNC Youth Council is now accepting resumes from young people interested in becoming At-Large members.

What exactly is an at-large member of the DNC? At-large members are full-scale, policy-shaping members of the Democratic National Committee who are appointed by the DNC Chairman and approved by the DNC.

Also take note of the fact that the Youth Council is a separate entity from Young Democrats — it is an official arm of the Democratic National Committee charged with winning over the youth vote for the Democratic Party. The Youth Council’s mission reads as follows (emphasis added):

The Democratic National Committee’s Youth Coordinating Council (Youth Council) was formally constituted as a council of the DNC in December 2005. The goal of the Youth Council is to increase opportunities and improve participation by young people, under age 36, in the activities and structure at all levels of the Democratic Party. Among the purpose and goals of the Youth Council is to ensure that the Democratic Party maintains a majority of the youth vote which it currently holds with a wide margin.

Reading all of this forces me to ask two critical questions. First, where is the Republican National Committee’s version of the Youth Council? I’ve previously written that the RNC must establish some sort of “Young Voter Outreach arm,” but to this day nothing of the sort seems to exist (or even be in the works). Indeed, when I did some Googling, the closest thing I could find was an outdated page that still has talking points related to President Bush’s accomplishments.

Second, why isn’t the RNC offering these same sort of full-scale voting positions to young voters? If the GOP wants to win over millennials, then the RNC must be willing to not only listen to young voters but also to give them a substantial role in shaping the future of the party. Putting highly qualified young Republicans in the position to have a real say in the decisions regarding the future of the Republican Party would demonstrate that the GOP actually cares about winning the youth vote and is not just comprised of older generations.

Earlier, Jon Henke wrote a blog post that concluded that:

Republicans had better become more appealing to young people, because patterns established in youth persist for life.

The Democratic National Committee is taking serious strides to woo the youngest bracket of voters by empowering them to make real decisions in the Democratic Party. Without the RNC doing the same, young voters will continue to flock to the Democratic Party — a dangerous trend that could establish a generation of lifelong Democrats. Michael Steele was installed to reform the Republican National Committee and right a rapidly sinking ship. So Mr. Steele, are you listening?

Crossposted at NextGenGOP.com.

In the radio and music industry, it's understood that people establish lifelong musical preferences in their teens and early 20's.  Nate Silver says this may also be true of political preferences.  Looking at new Gallup data on partisan identification by age, Silver tried mapping it against the question: "who was President when you turned 18?"

As it turns out, "the popularity -- or lack thereof -- of the President when the voter turned 18 would seem to have a lot of explanatory power for how their politics turned out later on".

In general, however, this points toward the idea that partisan identification -- while not exactly being "hard-wired" -- can be quite persistent as the voter moves through her lifecourse. Voters who came of age during the eight years of the Bush Presidency are roughly eight points more Democratic than the rest of the country; that advantage could be worth an extra point or two to Democrats throughout the next half-century.

As Kristen Soltis has pointed out here recently, "young voters began abandoning the Republican Party long before Barack Obama was even a serious contender for the presidency. Those pinning the Republican Party's poor fortunes among young voters on the Obama candidacy miss the source of the problem and certainly underestimate its severity."

Lesson: Republicans had better become more appealing to young people, because patterns established in youth persist for life. 

We simply cannot afford to lose a generation of young voters to the Democrats. As a follow-up to my first post from a few days back, I’d like to propose some specific changes that would better serve the Republican Party in recapturing the youth vote.

Establish a Young Voter Outreach arm of the Republican National Committee

We need to fight tooth and nail to bring young voters back to the Republican Party. Yes, the Young Republican National Federation and College Republican National Committee exist. The problem is that neither of these organizations actively serve to “sell” the Republican Party to young voters – rather, their purpose is to engage young voters who are already affiliated with the GOP. Thus, the Young Voter Outreach arm would serve to accomplish this, demonstrating to young voters that the Republican Party actually cares about winning their vote and is not just the party of older generations.

This arm of the RNC must be overseen by – surprise – a Republican under the age of 30. It would be responsible for working with the RNC’s eCampaign folks to launch new, state-of-the-art websites, blogs, and other online projects that are designed specifically to appeal to young voters who are not necessarily Republicans. One of the goals of these projects should be to serve to answer crucial questions like, “Why is the Republican Party’s platform the right one for me as a young voter?” or “Why should I, as a young voter, be alarmed about the Democrats’ plan to [insert bad policy here – redistribute the wealth, raise taxes, etc.]?”

But there’s more. As a Party, we need to begin building and then maintaining a strong base of young, up-and-coming Republicans, who in the near future can begin running for the U.S. House and Senate. These young candidates will help allow us to pursue a 435 district strategy while bringing new, fresh faces to the table. Therefore, the Young Voter Outreach arm would be responsible for identifying and recruiting these folks, but more importantly, it would encourage them to begin running for local offices and provide training sessions to show them how to run for an office and win.

Differentiate from Democrats Through Ideals of Limited Government

Over the next two years, the Democrats will look to expand government in many ways. As I noted in my first column, many young voters are decidedly libertarian, and thus they’ll frown on these changes – a circumstance that Republicans, as the party of free-markets and personal liberty, can capitalize upon.

Despite this, young voters are going to find it difficult to support the Republican Party if it remains the party that condones government intervention in such issues as gay marriage or the behavior of two consenting adults in their own bedroom. These socially conservative issues may be important to voters in the other generations, but in the eyes of many of my peers, government has no place in getting involved in these matters. Indeed, the Republican Party’s continued support of government involvement in these issues continues to reinforce the notion to many young voters that the GOP is the party of the older generations.

Clearly, some sort of common ground needs to be reached if the Republican Party wishes to appeal to the young voting bloc while not losing social conservatives. In terms of policy, what could this balance look like? On issues such as gay marriage, Republicans could advocate the voters in each state making their own statewide decision. Specifically, California’s Proposition 8 is a phenomenal example of how the voters – rather than the government – can determine their state’s position on this sort of issue. Abortion, however, is a slightly different animal. If you believe (as I do) that life begins at conception, then abortion is, quite simply, the infringement of another human being’s right to life. Since the federal government is charged with protecting people’s “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Republicans can fairly argue that it is the federal government’s responsibility to fight to limit abortion.

Taking this all into account, a forward-looking, pro-young voter platform statement for the Republican Party of the future should look something like this:

The Republican Party is the party of individual freedom, limited government, and personal choice. At the federal level, we will fight to reduce the size of government and make it more accountable to the people who fund it. We will fight to protect every human being’s God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And at the statewide level, we will work with the citizens to protect and preserve the traditional values upon which this great nation was built.

Rethink Our Branding and Organizational Identity

This one’s so simple, yet we cannot underestimate its importance: the fact is that a huge part of what drew young voters to Barack Obama was his hip, corporate-like branding and identity. Some might argue that this is shallow, but I strongly disagree. Instead, this is the reality of effective marketing. Indeed, it is the same reason that some brands flourish and while others fail miserably. Marketing is one of the most critical topics in the business world, and Barack Obama has taught us that it can be equally as significant in politics.

Just look at a side-by-side of the two candidate’s logos. Obama’s “O” logo probably has near 100% brand recognition – you don’t need the “Obama ‘08″ below it to know what it represents. On the other hand, if you took away McCain-Palin and left only the star at the top with the two lines extending out from it, would anyone have a clue what it represents? Nope.

Further, Obama’s simplistic yet impeccably memorable slogan of “hope” and “change” were consistent and didn’t change in the slightest since he entered the race. McCain didn’t maintain such a consistent message, and unfortunately, his “Country First” slogan that was implemented near the end of the race does not have the appeal of “hope” and “change.”

Fortunately, the Democratic Party itself does not have a branding or identity advantage over the Republican Party. This creates a unique opening for the GOP to take the initiative. Redesign the RNC’s logo and GOP.com to reflect the trends of Web 2.0. Find a unifying, clear-cut message for the party that carries wide-spread appeal. And most importantly, offer resources so that our candidates as well as our state and local parties can do the same.

Conclusion

The changes that I’ve identified in this post are necessary for the Republican Party to transform itself as the party of the future. A huge component that will be necessary to accomplishing this is the GOP’s ability to attract younger, fresh faces – the people who are this country’s future. Ultimately, the changes I propose all add up to one overreaching goal: to transform the Republican Party into one that represents all generations and embodies the core principles that make this nation so great.

This entry is cross-posted at NextGenGOP.

As everyone has heard repeatedly by now, the youth vote went big for Obama. While not as monolithic as the African-American and unmarried women blocs, the 18-29 bracket gave Obama a 2-1 lead. This is not a mere anomaly, it’s indicative of a significant shift, building upon Kerry’s 9-point advantage. And if the GOP doesn’t take note of this, it could be in for a long and weary exile. It’s important to note that despite the worst times for Republicans, 1 out of 3 youth still voted for them. Considering that even I, a rather staunch conservative, was tempted to vote for the savvy young guy, that’s still a significant number. The children of die-hard Republicans are still voting their party, and the problem is the middle, the independent or casual youth voters.

As a 21-year-old so-called "Millenial", I’d like to give some much-needed insight to whoever is willing to listen.

I have yet to see any hardcore in-depth analysis from the right about the psychology of the young voter, and this only makes me more fearful the party is painfully out of touch. The warning signals have been going off since 04, but seems to be ringing on deaf ears.

To be clear about this election, McCain had absolutely no chance of winning the youth. Period. Leaving issues aside, a 72-year-old pasty computer-illiterate man with a semi-creepy smile was never, ever going to beat a sharp, articulate, young, bi-racial man speaking of hope and change. And therein lies the first GOP problem – image. The problem is two-fold, both style and substance, but (as unfortunate as it is) style is something that takes precedence. So I will address it first.

Inclusive, not divisive, rhetoric

It’s not so much the physical makeup of the candidate that’s the problem, but the rhetoric and style of communication that has alienated the youth in the center. They are tired of divisive bantering, and have very little patience for partisan talk. They respond extremely negatively to “us versus them” speak. For a clear example of what youth do NOT want to hear, Sarah Palin referred to “real” Virginia and “pro-American” states. I shook my head when I heard that. This is absolutely toxic to the moderate youth. More than ever they want to hear inclusive dialogue, and Obama knows this and exploited it masterfully.

What the youth want to hear is someone who makes a clear effort to understand everyone’s views. Bush’s “with us or against” attitude has been a big factor in creating this backlash.

Project a sense of community

Another aspect Obama tapped into was a new sense of community that my generation responds highly to. Currently there is a deep longing to be part of a movement, to “change the world” so to speak. Group socialization is being driven by online networks, and gives youth a way to share their identities and identify common goals. Obama’s web efforts were absolutely genius in this regard, and I believe changed campaigning permanently. The GOP needs to catch up in this aspect, and fast. With Obama’s network in place, they have a massive advantage. But it’s not enough to copycat, the GOP needs a unique system, something creative and unique. Imitation is easily spotted and reinforces the perception the party is lacking original thought.

The one exception to this was the grassroots effort of Ron Paul, with his record-setting online donations and web campaigning. I remember distinctly at one point he had the highest political YouTube views, second only to Obama.

Use comedy, not fear, to attack the opponents

The vast majority of the online ads against Obama fell flat on the youth audience. Check out the YouTube comments and ratings for proof. Ominous music and low voices come off as contrived and phony. Right now there is huge skepticism of any negative message that could be construed as “fear-mongering”. Again, this is a backlash against the rhetoric of the last 8 years, which was defined by repeated threats of potential terrorist acts. They want to hear – brace yourselves – “hope”. They don’t find Democrats threatening at all, but rather Republicans. The one ad that I think had some potential was the popular “The One” which sarcastically mocked Obama. Now I doubt that it swayed any youth voters, but it might have made them laugh, which is better than making them roll their eyes. Palin was absolutely disqualified in the eyes of the youth, and largely because of the effective SNL skits and other mockeries. They came to honestly believe she literally wanted to ban books and teach creationism in school, because comedy became reality to them.

The GOP needs to find comedy and use it effectively if they want to frame the candidates and issues in their favor. The perception that liberals are creative and conservatives are not has some truth to it, because I see opportunities to slam and mock Democrats go unused, while no gaffe of Republicans goes unpunished. I can easily see some talent such as Matt Stone and Trey Parker, creators of South Park and Team America, being hired to produce something damning of liberals. Matt Stone has been quoted as saying “I hate conservatives, but I really f------ hate liberals” – there are sympathetic voices somewhere in the media, exploit them!

The issues

The next candidate must be detached from the Iraq War

While I believe that campaign style is what really elevated Obama, the issues are still significant, which is why Kerry, with a mediocre campaign, also beat Bush handily. The most glaring issue is the Iraq War. This really is the deal-breaker among the youth. Any future Republican candidate has to be completely disconnected from the decision to invade Iraq, and even then the party identification is still tainted. A future Republican candidate does not have to completely condemn the war, but he/she has to make a compelling case that he/she can be completely trusted to use military force only in the most threatening situation. Unless he/she can do this, expect the Democrat to be favored.

Distance him/herself from religious fundamentalism

One of the best ways to alienate the middle youth is to pander to the religious right. Yet again, the blame can be put on Bush, who referenced God in his decision to invade Iraq, among other things. As a second example, look to Elizabeth’s Dole “godless money” ad. A completely loser. In a sense this is connected to style and rhetoric – Obama’s church was hardly mainstream, but he was able to get a free pass because of his inclusive speeches and conscious efforts to downplay religion as a wedge. It’s when politicians start giving the impression that they want to mix religion into politics that the youth get turned off. And now that Obama’s pastor has been made an issue, expect any Republican politician’s pastor to be thoroughly inspected for inflammatory comments.

Downplay gay marriage – or lose the youth

While middle America still isn’t fond of gay marriage – see the bans in Florida, Arizona, and California, the younger generation is. Polling estimates about 75% of millennials think gay marriage should be legal. It is truly only a matter of time until gay marriage is a losing issue for Republicans to exploit. And some of the biggest opponents of gay marriage are African-Americans, a group that is clearly out of reach for the GOP. If Republicans think in 2012 they can nominate a candidate that aggressively wants an amendment to ban gay marriage, and win, they are mistaken. This can cause a big rift between the religious right and moderates, and it’s an issue that will need to be addressed. I personally believe the most painless solution is an end to the government use of “marriage” – and replaced with a universal “civil union/contract” that is completely detached from the traditional definition. Marriage can be defined by faith communities, and churches should be protected to practice their tradition. I see no other easy resolution to this issue in the future.

Downplay abortion as well

The generational attitudes about abortion haven’t changed much, from what I’ve read. So I don’t necessarily think a shift in policy is required, but the way it’s phrased needs to be changed. A presidential candidate should emphasize that – regardless of how they think it should be treated legally – they won’t use their power as president to criminalize it. I believe even a completely anti-abortion candidate can win the moderates if they assure Americans they won’t push the issue on a federal level.

Say nice things about the environment

Right now there is a (in my opinion, silly and contrived) green movement among the youth. It’s ubiquitous, even Miley Cyrus – an environmental policy expert I’m sure – is singing and imploring kids to go green. Whether this translates into actual action, who knows. But it’s catchy at the moment, and Republicans can’t ignore it and go on endlessly about offshore drilling. “Drill, baby, drill!” is hardly an attractive response to “Go Green!” A concern for the environment needs to be sincerely expressed. If a cap-and-trade system is bad for the country, it needs to be made clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. The moderate’s knee-jerk reaction to global warming, etc, is to “save the planet”, any action otherwise needs to be defended clearly and emphatically.

Explain why Big Government sucks

…and do it well. While Democrats are going to inevitably interpret their wins as a mandate for big programs, that’s not necessarily the case. Most youth don’t quite draw a connection between Obama and expansive, wasteful government, at least no more than to Bush. It’s possible that after 4 or 8 years they’ll listen up. Free markets are still fairly popular among moderate youth, financial crisis notwithstanding. There are plenty of government programs that could be attacked – such as social security. When the youth start to realize that they might not have any retirement because of the nature of social security, they might be receptive to arguments that government programs aren’t the best idea. Emphasize the beauty of individualism, attack the idea of centralized power dictating their lives, and there will be an audience. And that whole mandated volunteer service plan of Obama’s might not be so popular after 4 years.

In Conclusion

It’s important for the older generations to see the current political scene from the perspective of generation Y – imagine your entire political opinions being informed by a few years of Clinton and eight years of Bush. Imagine you know little to nothing about Carter or Reagan.

Based on what I’ve outlined, the GOP needs a candidate that speaks inclusively, expresses moderation on social issues, is disconnected from Bush and the Iraq war, expresses concern for the environment, and runs a campaign that is web and community-based, relies less on fear/negativity, and refuses to pander to fundamentalism. Coincidentally I essentially summarized Obama’s campaign. While reading these items, it seems all too obvious, but based on the performance of McCain and the GOP, it apparently isn’t. Looking at the lineup of Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, and Sarah Palin, I’d say the Republicans are doomed to lose the youth vote for some time.

This post was actually written off a Release from Ashley Barbera, but I thought I'd cross post for your enjoyment.

--

You all may remember that in July, we sponsored a contest on STORM, with the prize being free housing at the Republican National Convention.  The College Republicans who won had a great week in Minneapolis-St. Paul, getting to participate in some great events during the day, and watch the speakers in the convention hall every night.

However, it turns out that one of the winners wasn't a CR.  He wasn't even a Republican.  Michael Connery, a blogger for the leftist site FutureMajority.com, disguised his identity in order to infiltrate STORM and become one of the winners.  His ultimate goal was to obtain embarrassing footage of College Republican leaders in order to harm Senator McCain's standing with young voters, but he failed.

What's worse, another blogger reports that Connery conspired with a Rock the Vote employee to complete his subterfuge, reporting that: "Using dozens of different e-mail addresses, Connery and friends voted up his account. Sarah Burris, an activist with Rock the Vote and a pal of Connery's, has 30 different email accounts registered with storm…He pretended not to know his friend Burgiss (sic), in town working with Rock the Vote, throughout the convention." 

Rock the Vote is a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization, subject to strict laws and regulations governing its participation in the election process.  The organization and its employees are legally prohibited from participating in activities that would promote a specific political party or candidate over another.

I have to say, this whole thing is really lame.  This guy lied and tricked his way into winning a College Republican contest.  Other than perhaps fulfilling some childhood dream to be a spy, what exactly did Connery accomplish?  Absolutely nothing.  Meanwhile, the poor CR who was first runner up in the contest was robbed of his or her chance to go to the Convention.  After last week, I can say firsthand that going to a political convention is an incredible experience, and Michael Connery should be ashamed that he stole that amazing opportunity away from a dedicated young activist just so he could try to write a story he could sell to a magazine.

Ethan and Charlie both released statements on the issue:

"This sort of behavior from an employee of a non-partisan organization is completely unacceptable," said Ethan Eilon, Executive Director of the College Republican National Committee. "Sarah Burris' participation in Connery's plot is unethical at best, and is possibly illegal.  The College Republicans demand that Burris be dismissed from her position, and that Rock the Vote issue a public apology for their connection to this matter."

College Republican National Chairman Charlie Smith added: "Connery and Burris' twisted plot of lies and subterfuge is ridiculous behavior in a free and open democracy.  Their sad attempt to embarrass the College Republicans demonstrates the liberal desperation to discredit the conservative youth movement.  Barack Obama's advantage with young voters is rapidly dwindling. Several recent polls have shown Obama's lead among young voters has dropped from 30 points to nearly single digits in only a month.  Connery and Burris' behavior shows that Democrats will clearly do anything to disguise the rapid shift of young voters towards the candidacies of Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin."