Why I vote How I do, and Why my Age Group Drives me Insane

A lovely little article in the globe and mail that I won't bother linking made the same tired argument socialist pollsters have been making since I can remember.  Basically, it looks something like this: Young people don't vote, but when polled they're fashionably "progressive".  The conservatives get practically wiped out, and we have a fun blend of NDP, Liberal, and Bloc voting.

Here's why the whole concept is not only irrelevant, but actually dangerous when applied.
First of all, in the Canadian example, the Bloc Québecois gets to be the official opposition.  Think the Sovereignty issue would really die with Gilles Duceppe in Stornoway? Me either.  Secondly, the NDP and Greens, with their interchangeable policy, would constantly be trading voter blocs.  You see, this poll scenario is Rep by Pop, rather than First Past the Post.  So if young voters turn out en masse and start splitting the vote, even if they can amass the votes necessary to hold a seat each party is on ludicrously shaky ground.  Politics degenerates even further into the game of who can give the most candy.

That's the second problem.  Young people tend to be Issue voters.  Stupid ones, at that.  You see, young men will pick one issue to become passionate about and then use their knowledge to impress young women.  Young women, on the other hand, pick an issue that affects them more directly.  While the feminine tendency is more rational, it also makes pandering so very easy.  A quick study on the young women in your district, and you discover that the majority are university students with debt and little interest in children.  So you stand up an attractive young man as a candidate, who speaks with great emotional empathy about the environment and the need to do away with "corporate greed".  He sticks to the script (teleprompter) and sweeps the youth vote.   After all, young men are idiots and want to impress the smart young women by agreeing with them.

If you haven't figured out where I'm going with this, I'd be surprised.  You see, we already know what happens when the youth turnout surges.  We get President Obama and the Pelosi Democrats.  Believe it or not, there is more public expression of outrage NOW than there was under GW Bush.  Why?  Because young people generally have no political attention span.  They were "part of something" and got their man in office.  But now that it's time for the dirty, uninspiring, and often nasty work of governance, the youth voters are nowhere to be found.  You can't pick up that cute Human Development major over an organic chai-latte by discussing the dangers of federal overreach and how term limits might be a good idea for representatives too.  You don't bring a tear to her eye, or blood to his ears, by discussing the failures of socialist monetary policy and the dangers of allowing too much foreign debt ownership.

Elections are about Grand Ideas.  Politics are about how many details you can wrest from the Devil.  Young voters don't think about consequences because they won't be the ones picking up the tab (or so they think).  Mobilize, vote, disappear on some humanitarian mission to Guatemala, and when the World hasn't Begun to Heal, and it turns out The Oceans Weren't Rising in the First Place, you can blame it on those damn old people and their cynicism.