Yes we can was the calling card of Barack Obama in 2008 but as 2012, and re-election approaches its looking more like “no we can’t” after a string of broken promises, and failed initiatives. This is definitely not the era of ‘hope and change.’
Similarly here in Britain, the so called ‘Cleggmania’ which followed the televised election debates of 2010, brought Sheffield’s own Nick Clegg out of the wilderness of Liberal Democrat politics and into the national consciousness.
Both of these politicians arguably owe their positions of power to a large extent to young people, to students.
Nick Clegg was a fresh face, who spoke in a direct, casual style about issues that mattered to large numbers of the student population including tuition fees and green energy.
But what engaged us with him, ultimately, is what drove many young people away.
As a result, this invites the question: is it inevitable that young people in society become disaffected with politics? Looking at the two examples on either side of the Atlantic, it would seem so. Clegg reneged on his pact with the electorate; he “sold his soul” as one Daily Mirror headline professed. By going back on his promise to students that he would never increase tuition fees, Clegg seemed to seal his own fate.
When a Liberal Democrat candidate lost out in local elections in the town of Beverley, he claimed in an interview that what surprised him most was that young people weren’t turning out to vote.
But when students hear speeches riddled with broken promises, failed initiates and see seemingly genuine politicians turning their backs so readily on the pledges they have made, is it really a surprise when they don’t turn out to vote?
Photo: Matt Ortega
Similarly in the US, Obama’s story echoed Cleggs’. Walking triumphantly into the White House on a cool, crisp January morning in 2009, it seemed as though anything was possible.
“The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation” – just some of the inspirational words Obama gave to America’s younger generation.
When such excitement builds up, and there is a feeling that revolutionary changes will be made, of course expectations cannot possibly be met. Issues such as the economy and environmental protection take time; they are slow drawn out processes that cannot be fixed with the flick of a magic wand. Compounded by the rise of the Tea Party movement, and high unemployment figures, the re-election of Barack Obama is looking precarious.
Young voters in America were promised change. But what was that change? With a system of government that requires the White House to work in tandem with the Senate and the House of Representatives, compromise, deal making, and partisan politics is inevitable. Indeed, it is what the Founding Fathers intended. When the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives, Obama did not have the luxury of doing whatever he wanted.
He had to make concessions on issues such as universal health care, environment legislation and laying off huge numbers of public sector workers.
But in doing this, it seemed to those millions of ‘college kids’ as though he was just the same, another politician not delivering. Rather than changing Washington and getting spending under control, America now has the largest budget deficit in its history.
So, with re-election for Obama coming up next year, and Nick Clegg being reviled in the eyes of much of the public, a strategy must be employed to win back the youth vote that many commentators have said put them into office in the first place.
For Clegg, the tuition fees debacle will be difficult to recover from. In an ICM poll he was voted the most deceitful politician in the country by young people. One third of people polled said they cannot trust him anymore.
This is a huge turn around, considering after the first television debate he was named the most popular political leader in the country since Churchill.
Nevertheless, many believe Clegg and the Liberal Democrats have done a lot to be proud of. They have taken everyone earning under £10,000 per year out of tax.
They have tempered NHS reforms, and with Chris Huhne heading the Department for Energy and Climate Change, the Lib Dems have pushed green policies such as the creation of a green investment bank.
The Lib Dems have done a lot, but arguably have failed to communicate it. Maybe people just aren’t listening. Perhaps the only hope for the Lib Dems not being decimated at the next election is if Nick Clegg is removed as leader.
However a better PR strategy, and a stronger assertion of differences between the two coalition parties could win the public back over.
For Obama, there is an equally difficult mountain to climb in terms of winning re-election. His controversial way of dealing with the deficit has given him a meagre approval rating of 39 per cent in a recent poll.
In 2008, it was all about the ‘e-election,’ the ‘change’ campaign, the internet, young people, and inspiration.
But with a nervous electorate this will not hold water. People want substantive policies that will give America sustainability for the future.
Who the Republicans choose as their candidate may affect Obama’s chances. If they go with a Tea Party style politician such as Texas’ Rick Perry, or the firebrand Michele Bachmann, Why? Because no matter how much young people are disappointed, many young Americans think the consequences of a Tea Party presidency would be too dire to contemplate.
In reality, if a moderate conservative who appeals to independent voters, and has a business background such as Mitt Romney runs, then Obama could be in trouble.
Looking at Obama and Clegg, it is easy to see that there is an ocean sized gulf between promises and reality, expectation and deliverance. As former Governor of New York Mario Cuomo once put it, “We campaign in poetry, but govern in prose.”
But with this problem, how can young people sustain an interest in political life? After all, politics is central to our existence. No we are not in love with politicians, but by not engaging what right do we as individuals have to complain about the cuts, education policy, and every issue that affects our lives?