Celebrities Influence On Young Voters

Since 1972, youth voter turnout has been on the decline. According to the Child Trends Databank, 50 percent of Americans aged 18 to 24 participated in the 1972 presidential election (2015). Nearly three decades later, the percentage of young adults aged 18 to 24 who voted in the 2000 presidential election had dropped eighteen

Political inactivity on the part of young Americans stems from one fundamental source -- a general cynicism of the American political process. This disdain for politics is further perpetuated by a lack of voter education and a needlessly archaic voting procedure that creates barriers to voting where they need not exist. While many of these existing problems can be rectified with relative ease through the implementation of programs such as Internet voting and better voter education, such programs create only a partial solution.

The message emerging from a recent research series on youth civic and political participation is clear: today's youth are not disjoined from associational and small political life, but they are increasingly disenchanted with formal political institutions and practices. Children and youth under 18 have made sententious strides in recent years toward fuller involvement in democratic processes. These strides,

I believe that before the presidential election of 2008 the group of people who would most likely vote is people ranging from 30 to 65 years old. The reason is people usually around 30 to 65 years old are in a stage of their life where they’ve established their homes, probably have a stable job, and settled in their communities. So, those who usually come from a stable community roots are more likely to have reason and greater resources to becoming involved in politics and to vote. However, over the recent years younger generations are starting to vote because of mobilization through social media. This new technology allows candidates to really engage the younger people by websites like Facebook which will help them become informed on polls,

In chapter one, Wattenberg discusses the declining trends of Americans who regularly read newspapers between the 1960’s and present day. This can be attributed the aging patterns among generations who frequently read newspapers as well as with the use of technology rising. Reading the newspaper is a habit that either is or is not developed by the time one reaches voting age. With this, newspapers have become an older generation’s primary source of information, however, are still the best source for political matters. Younger generations tend to be more computer literate and have grown up with television and media more accessible to them than the previous generation. These trends not only reflect in American culture, but in other countries

Additionally to television, many political figures including Barrack Obama use social networking as a way to reach American citizens. Social networking is practically a right of passage among youth today. Political influences are in all types of media. Any young person that uses social networking or watches television is choosing to not pay attention to politics. “It would be reading too much into such responses to say that these two-thirds of young Americans didn’t value voting; they could well have seen voting as a fundamental right or a crucial choice. Nevertheless, without a

According to Source C, “Our national politics has become a competition for images or between images, rather than between ideals.” This idea can lead to consequences because the person who has a better personality is not guaranteed to be the one who is more capable of leading a country. When the unqualified person is chosen to lead the country, then its citizens will suffer. In source B, the author states, “ Because of television’s celebrity system, Presidents are losing their distinctiveness as social actors and hence are often judged by standards formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars.” Chances are people who are rock singers and movie stars do not know how to run a country because they focus only on their own image and prioritize that above everything else. In the case of an election, the president should be someone who holds up to the ideals of democracy. With the help of the television, candidate's actions are monitored at all times. But this influence can potentially transform the election into a personality contest that defeats the purpose of a fair

"You don 't get the chance to make America great by getting rid of everything that made America great,” Stated by Hillary Clinton during her campaign rally in St. Louis, Missouri to attack candidate Donald Trump from his previous diverse rhetoric. Political Rhetoric has been very popular in today’s society. Politics use this as a platform to criticize other candidates about important points that are essential to the United States and its citizens. Not only does others believe that political rhetoric is out of control but it is a negative form of art. During election time, the media and the internet are critical for candidates because it gives them easy access to the younger audience. Although social media is enormous in today’s society, this is the best way for young voters to make their voices heard. Scott Keeter a research analyst and exit poll analyst for NBS News stated that “Young voters have given the Democratic Party a majority of their votes, and for all three cycles they have been the party’s most supportive age group” (Keeter, 1). According to U.S. Census Bureau over the course of time the rate of younger voters “Dropped from 50.9% percent in 1964 to 38.0 percent in 2012” (U.S. Census Bureau, 2).However, the media continue to evolve with modern society. I believe that rhetoric such as visual political rhetoric helps the youth to get more involved with the political arguments while being educated and entertained at the same time.

We see young adults voicing their opinion many times in protests during the presidential election. There are many of them participating in protests to support their presidential candidate or to tear down the ones they dislike in this year's current election as well. But, as history has proven, their voices will be unanswered, despite it being so loud, because the

Because of their fame, celebrities have an advantage when it comes to entering the political arena without experience. Perhaps the most successful example of this is Ronald Reagan. Reagan is widely known for his acting abilities but he makes the jump into the political world when he is elected as the Governor of California. This advancement allows for him to later go on to become President of the United States. In addition to Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, of The Terminator, also has been elected as Governor of California despite having no background in politics. Those are just the two instances of successful celebrities-turned-politicians. Indeed, other famous candidates are less than successful in politics. An example of a celebrity

While this sounds good there was plenty of miss information and understanding to the youth vote. In fact the youth vote was still the smallest compared to other ages and relative to everyone that voted. The large push was seen by minorities voting for could have been seen as a different color president. This is not to say that they voted for him purely by his color, but that it worked in his favor. All ages and races where seen on the media supporting the idea for a African American president. Even though the youth did see a relative increase in voting from year to year it did not compare to the usually suspects who do vote. Another aspect to mention is the midterm elections so the same usually numbers of youth voting, which was further evidence that the 2008, election saw more coverage and hype than others.

The growing connection between politics and Hollywood has happened for a number of reasons, in a somewhat cyclical fashion. Politicians need Hollywood stars to support their campaigns because celebrities are useful in fundraising attempts and recognition. They have the advantages of fame, wealth, and can easily command press attention. In return, celebrities endorse candidates whose policies are beneficial to their industry. For example, while Clinton was in office he argued for “industry self-regulation and a television rating system, as opposed to formal government regulation” (Ormand and West 38). For this and other reasons, Hollywood stars donated large sums of money to Democratic candidates in return. In 2000, Hollywood contributed $20 million to Democrats as opposed to the $13 million that was contributed to the less Hollywood-friendly Republican party (Ormand and West 40).

Many have thought the entertainment world should be separate from the world of politics. Some celebrities go on to be involved in politics, such as Ronald Reagan and Sonny Bono, but rarely does an entertainer command a large sphere of influence in the world of entertainment and politics simultaneously. While entertainers can move the masses, their voice is usually discarded among politicians. In addition to this, many have highlighted the negative influence of the entertainment industry, and particularly rock music, on American culture. Often, it is seen as a corrupting force that leads people astray. For many people, rock and roll seems to highlight all that is wrong with American popular culture. These critics fail to take note of

In 2007, President Barack Obama launched a very successful social media campaign that helped him beat Clinton, and then eventually John McCain (New York Times, 2008). The Obama campaign created “an unforeseen force to raise money, organize locally, fight smear campaigns and get out the vote that helped them topple the Clinton machine and then John McCain and the Republicans.” The 2008 election was the first election where every candidate reached out to people through social media (US News, 2008). Facebook cofounder, Chris Hughes, was able to help President Barack Obama and have his campaign soar. As expected, because of President Barack Obama’s Facebook campaign he reached out to the youth and they were all part of the reason he went on to become our President.

When the founding fathers drafted the Constitution their main focus was creating a nation where everyone would be free from the restraints of a controlling government and treated equal. America has always been a nation of freedom, and needs to remain that way. The youth in this country is charged with the task of ensuring that America remains the “land of the free”. Without involvement in politics this is not possible. If youth are to maintain the American ideals of freedom and equality it is imperative that they be involved in politics. Voting every four years for the president, who is more of a figure head than anything else, is simply not enough. Young people need to take a more active role in politics such as running for a political office, local or national. This is the only way they will be able to put their beliefs into action and ensure that America upholds it’s long standing values of freedom and equality. The youth need to start taking action as soon as they are old enough. However, young people need to be educated on politics and be firm in their beliefs before delving into the world of politics. In recent years the youth have shown a trend of disengagement and apathy toward political involvement. According to “The Good Citizen”, a book written by Russell J. Dalton, political analysts and politicians agree that the youth are losing interest in politics and