.jpg)
Last night in Iowa, record numbers showed up to participate in one of our country's most unique democratic rituals. Democrats and Republicans blew away previous participation records at the Iowa caucuses by nearly 50-percent.
In the case of the Democrats, they decisively chose Barack Obama. While Huckabee's win on the Republican side is probably attributable to the turnout of evangelical Christians, the credit for Obama's Iowa victory is due to an unheard-of number of "young voters under 30" who showed up in overwhelming numbers. For many, it was the first time they've ever participated.
So, are there lessons about motivating young people in Obama's victory? Definitely. I think we'll be seeing more stories about this in the coming weeks. Three critical things pushed Iowa's younger voters (many college students) to rally: the appeal of change, a competitive field, and peer excitement.
Young people, in general, like change. They embrace ever-changing technology, they live in a different place every year, they change their loyalties and their peer groups much faster than their parents. To us old folks, your young lives seem chaotic and tumultuous, but the change seems normal to you. Change is fun and cool. Stability is boring and unappealing. The chance to propel a Black or female candidate into a viable candidacy has been motivating Iowa's young people for quite a while.
Most of the pundits are saying that Obama better positioned himself as the Democrat candidate representing change, and that likely appealed to younger voters who are drawn to an opportunity to shake things up. Although her gender probably played to her advantage with younger voters early on, Hillary Clinton didn't do a good job of playing herself as the change candidate, and that probably hurt her with young voters. On the Republican side, the appeal of "change" has been playing out in the remarkable fundraising totals of candidate Ron Paul.
Second... Students love a competition, and by all measures, this year's Democratic and Republican primaries have been one hell of a contest. Front-runner status changes constantly. Absolutely no one knew who was going to win on the Democratic side two days ago.
Competition energizes college students -- we see that constantly with competitive charity fund-raisers on college campuses. The fact that no one knew who would win definitely got students jazzed. Every student probably felt that his or her attendance could make a difference, and they were probably grabbing their friends and pulling them along to the caucuses. Had someone been leading in either party by 10-15 percentage points in the polls, you would not have seen the same young voter turnout.
Third, there was a lot of excitement on college campuses throughout Iowa surrounding the caucuses this year. It's all they've been hearing about for a year or more. If their peers had been apathetic about the contests, then many students would have been less interested, and turnout would have been disappointing. But, when your peers are constantly talking about the contests and there is massive peer pressure and excitement to get out and participate, momentum builds. You want to be where your friends are. It was literally UNCOOL not to get out and have your voice be heard last night.
We will only see this phenomenon in Iowa this year -- the intensity is just not the same in other primary competitions. Iowa gave us one hell of a case study in college student motivation and the lessons are these...
Students like something new and different that represents a change of mindset or norm. Students enjoy something competitive, where their effort has a discernible impact on the outcome. And, students take their cue from the excitement of their peer group. Give them something new and different, make it exciting with an uncertain outcome, and get the buzz going hard.
Do those things, and you can make amazing things happen. Just ask Barack Obama.
