I, for one, was delighted at the surge of new, mostly younger people who registered to vote for the first time in order to support Ron Paul in this year’s presidential primaries and caucuses. I explained to non-Paul supporters that the GOP should embrace them because the Republican Party is aging and needs new blood.
However, I saw a study of new, mostly younger people who registered to vote for the first time in 2008 for Barack Obama which makes me wonder about the long-term impact of Paul people.
A study conducted by two political scientists at my alma mater The University of San Francisco discovered that of the 2.1-million first time voters in California who showed up for Obama in 2008, most left other offices blank and didn’t vote on major issue referenda questions involving gay marriage and parental notification of a minor’s abortion request either.
The authors speculate that in 2008 this was evidence that many of the Obama voters were just that — voters more dedicated to the candidate than his liberal causes.
And they tested their hypothesis further by comparing 2010 election data and discovered that most of these new voters did not even show up at the polls two years after voting for Obama. Voting patterns in 2010 were not much different from the voting patterns before this new bloc of voters registered.
As I watch the enthusiasm of the Paul people and meet many younger people who registered to vote for the first time because they believed themselves disenfranchised by the parties, I wonder whether the same results as the Obama voter study would ensue or whether they will stay active in the mundane lower ballot campaigns and become a force within the Republican Party.
My hope is that Paul people will follow the template set by we Youth for Goldwater of the 1960s and suffer through the mundane in order to build a movement within the party. Instead of disappearing after his trouncing by LBJ, we kept the Goldwater movement alive at the grassroots level. Within 20 years, most of us from Youth for Goldwater were either working in media, working as policy advisors in the White House and Congress or actually elected to office and Ronald Reagan, who gave pep talk speeches at Youth for Goldwater rallies, was POTUS.
On July 9th, 2012 at 10:45 am
Young Paul voters play a different role than young Obama voters. Young Obama voters pushed him to victory in the general. Young Paul voters failed to push Paul to victory in the primary. At the same time, primary voters are typically more engaged than general election voters. And Paul’s message is much more specific than “hope and change”.
Nonetheless, the question Dave poses is interesting. And it would be interesting to know how many Paul voter’s skipped down ballot races, especially ballot propositions.
Also, in 2008, Obama ran against the “liberal” cause of gay-marriage, not for it as your article implies. Many black voters turned out in California and voted for Obama and decisively for hetero-marriage. I also don’t remember that abortion was a major issue in the 2008 campaign, and the California abortion restrictions failed to pass despite the abstentions of young Obama supporters. Nationally, abortion is much more likely to be an issue in 2012, given all the abortion legislation that Republicans have pushed and/or passed since 2010.
On July 11th, 2012 at 8:46 am
If they remain active, they won’t do so in the Republican Party. Why would they? The only true pro-liberty candidate the GOP has to offer (and don’t give me Amash, because he supports DOMA and is strongly “pro-life”) got cast out of the party’s biggest role by a politician that provides more of the same as we’re used to. They have nothing to gain by staying in this party.
If these disenfranchised activists stay active, it will likely be to support third party candidates and independents like Johnson who want to minimize government, unlike either major party. Worse, many of them will support moderate Democrats as the least-worst option, for their tendency toward a more open social contract. The radicalization of the Tea Party by the extreme right has not helped this cause.
If the GOP wants to keep the Paul activists, it needs to prove that it can support everyone’s rights- not just the rights of heterosexual men. It needs to get the hell out of people’s bedrooms and focus on minimizing government impediments to the pursuit of happiness, such as excessive taxes and regulation.
On July 11th, 2012 at 10:58 am
Ron Paul lacks the media stardom that drove all of the second-handers to vote for Obama. So comparing the two isn’t very accurate. Ron Paul doesn’t have the personality appeal that other politicians have – his strength is his message.
On July 11th, 2012 at 7:37 pm
I am an older Republican, but I now support Ron Paul. I am tired of Republicans and Democrats lying and playing the Game. I want someone that is not going to lie to the American People, I want someone who will do what they say, I want someone that is not corrupt, I want someone that defends the constitution…to date, Only Ron Paul has that good of a record. Watch and mark my words, if Romney gets the Presidency, he will not accomplish anything…then come back and read this -> (I told you so)
On July 12th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Been meaning to comment on this article.
It was thought provoking but perhaps not in the way the author intended. In some sense the author answers their own question… by elevating Paul to a celebrity level it effectively puts him on the same level as Obama. It’s much more important to vote for the message as opposed to the man/woman.
Ironically the author speaks of young Goldwater supporters… and hopes Paul supporters will follow the template of them yet for some reason leaves off the most famous young Goldwater supporter… Goldwater girl Hillary Clinton. In fact, the author seems almost clueless about history… while I don’t consider Reagan a NeoCon, he sold out to the NeoCon’s to become presidency and Goldwater himself remarked to Bob Dole during the 1996 convention that they were the new “liberals” of the party hijacked by the neocons.
Most voters are flaky and vote for rock stars. Time will tell if the young educated themselves or will move on to the next fad. Frankly, and this is a general comment… the founding fathers got it right by limiting the vote to property owners. While I’m not suggesting going back to only allowing white male property owners to vote, this county was designed as a Republic… not a democracy. Special interests control more and more, in particular as voters become more disconnected.
What will make the difference is if Ron Paul supporters don’t sell their principles out for power. I’m deeply disturb with some of the directions the movement has taken…. from Paul supporters endorsing liberty haters like Gary Glenn to the politics of division and back room deals some are practicing. It’s like they forgot Ron Paul’s major appeal is he stayed the course of principle. Believe it or not, they matter.