The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama’s Historic Victory

For youth organizations, the concept of peer-to-peer campaigning is nothing new. The Young Democrats of America have used peer-to-peer as the core of their campaigns for years, and organizations like the Bus Project have been innovating in the field with such methods. The Obama campaign embraced peer-to-peer as the most effective way to get voters to show up to the polls, especially new and infrequent voters. As Plouffe says, “the best way to get new people to caucuses and polls was to have a family member, friend, or neighbor ask them to go.”

Peer-to-peer served multiple purposes for the Obama campaign: turnout and GOTV, list-building, and persuasion. Using peer-to-peer to build strong organizations in the states was elevated in the Obama campaign more than in presidential campaigns in the past:

This time I believed that our state campaigns should be the driving factor. Registering voters, person-to-person persuasion, building strong local organizations, boosting turnout where we needed to, and gathering as big an e-mail list as possible would be more important than advertising to our ultimate success. It is much more effective to throw late-stage surplus funds on TV than to field operations, which need time and infrastructure to grow.

Peer-to-peer grows organically, and as such it takes time to coalesce into an effective state or local organization. Friends, family, and neighbors recruit friends, family, and neighbors, who in turn reach out to their own networks. Young voters talk to and organize other young voters at the places where they live and hang out. The Obama campaigns state organizations were built on person-to-person outreach and trust, which made them very strong and cohesive as they grew.

Trust and similarity make for effective organizers:

We believed local people talking to their neighbors, friends, and family, to address these doubts, could create a permission structure whereby voters rationalized, ‘Well, you’re supporting him enthusiastically . We think alike, live the same types of lives. You see something in him, and that’s important to me.’

The campaign’s message is much more convincing when delivered by a trusted person or someone who seems to be in a similar place in life. They Obama campaign took advantage of this by making sure every supporter was equipped with the right message:

Through e-mailed talking points, postings on the website, and conversations with local field organizers, our volunteers were stressing the same arguments Obama, Biden, Ax, and Gibbs were delivering on any given day. Our philosophy was that John from Durango needed to be as current on the campaign as the candidate was. We wanted to build a message-delivery army in perfect harmony from top to bottom.

Because this organizing was being done by volunteers and supporters, and these supporters were encouraged to be unyielding in their efforts, they were able to focus on non-traditional voters and not solely a traditional campaign universe:

Our supporters’ involvement couldn’t end at making calls or knocking on doors from preapproved lists; they had to approach everyone they could, no matter their electoral history, and make a personal case for why their targets should support Obama. It was the surest way to expand the electorate in our favor.

The Obama campaign proved to many doubters what youth organizers have been saying for years: peer-to-peer wins elections.

Check out the other posts in this series:
Young Voters in The Audacity to Win
Technology in The Audacity to Win

• 1 Comment

The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama’s Historic Victory

“Technology played a key role in our success. Reaching an audience involves more than just figuring out who your audience is; it also means knowing how to find them. Part of the reason our campaign was so successful is that we were able to identify early that many of the people we wanted to reach were spending more of their time on the Internet. We realized that a smart, and large, Internet presence was the best way to provide people with the opportunity and the tools to get involved in the campaign–they were already immersed in the world of technology and would be more likely to encounter us there. We met people where they lived, instead of forcing them to deviate from their habits or lifestyle to seek us out. Our early commitment to a digitally based platform paid huge dividends.” – David Plouffe

The Obama campaign utilized technology and the internet more effectively than any campaign in history. Throughout The Audacity to Win David Plouffe reveals how and why they were so successful.

Online Advertising

As I mentioned in yesterday’s post about the role of young voters in the campaign, they used specifically targeted online advertising to reach young voters and other underrepresented demographics to promote information about how to caucus or vote early.

There was a strong long-tail effect with the efficacy of their online ad spending:

Our return on Internet advertising was unbelievable. Each dollar invested in list growth returned several times that–immediately. Over time, as these new recruits game more money (and time), the return grew even greater. This result was highly unusual. Customarily, organizations are paying several dollars just to get someone to sign up on their list, only to see many people decline to take the next step of involvement, like contributing.

The ability to micro-target ads for certain demographics or specific online searches, combined with a pay-per-click structure, made online advertising a much higher return on investment than traditional pay-per-spot blanket advertising. In addition, the online advertising was trackable and provided valuable metrics.

Text Messaging

The most impressive decision in terms of mobile that the campaign made was to announce Biden as the Vice-Presidential candidate via text to build their list of mobile numbers:

The idea appealed to me on two levels. First, it was consistent with other key junctures in the campaign–reporting fund-raising numbers, the decision to limit our primary debates, opting out of the public funding system–where we had communicated first directly to our supporters. This was their campaign as much as ours, and they deserved to get a heads-up from us about important decisions. Those previous announcements had all been made by e-mail or Web postings; this would be our first large-scale text-only notification. Second, this was a great way to grow our text-messaging list. Rospars was right about the increasing gap in our contact figures: our e-mail list was now over 6 million, but our list of mobile numbers was in the low six figures. Making a big announcement by text would ignite a spark and juice the latter number.

It sure did. By August 22, the night before we announced Biden, over 2 million people had signed up to receive the VP announcement by text. Our first communication announcing the ‘Be the First to Know’ campaign had happened on August 10. In less than two weeks, we had grown our list over fifteen-fold.

Mobile is often under-utilized or ignored by campaigns. The commitment to the platform that led to the Biden announcement decision paid off. With 2 million people on the mobile list the campaign could send rapid response texts, vote reminders, and event invitations through a medium with an extremely high open rate.

Online Fundraising

The Obama campaign made history with their online fundraising success. One reason they were so successful is that they showed a genuine appreciation and respect for low-dollar online fundraisers:

In our campaign, grassroots supporters started to raise money. Generally, they brought in relatively small amounts–$100, $500, $1,000–using a tool on our social-networking site to keep track of the money they raised and to ask others to contribute.

Over time this grew into a powerful force. We treated these citizen fundraisers as no less important than our larger raisers. They were asked to join conference calls with Barack, me, and other senior staff so we could thank them for what they were doing and give them updates on the campaign. They believed their effort was valued–and it was–so they dug deeper and kept raising. This was not a tactical relationship. It was authentic. And that authenticity became a very powerful driver in the connection between Barack Obama and his supporters.

The campaign also realized that these initial low-dollar donors were in for the long haul. They “believed that making a financial contribution would lead people to feel more invested in the campaign and could result in higher degrees of activism” and if they could ensure these donors “felt part of and connected to the whole campaign, they might be more generous over time.”

E-mail

The Obama campaign had a massive e-mail operation, and because of this and their commitment to metrics and research they were able to learn a lot about their techniques and what supporters wanted.

We also learned a lot about the regular e-mail messages we were sending out. People wanted information, and a lot of it. We could send more e-mail than we originally thought advisable, which spoke to the heightened interest in the race and the commitment of our supporters. To keep things fresh, we varied the length and tone of the messages–some were long and informative, others quite short and informal. Perhaps most important, we learned that people responded very well to e-mails from Michelle Obama and that we needed to use Barack somewhat sparingly–when he signed an e-mail it always produced by far the biggest response, but we did not want this to become a stale event. So many of the e-mails came from me, though when we needed a big response to an ask–for money, volunteer time, or to watch an event–we made sure the e-mails came from the Obamas.

It is important to note how many variables the campaign looked at when making decisions about e-mail. They consciously saved their big guns for the most important messages as opposed to having every e-mail come from the Obamas. The variety of the messages help decrease the feeling that supporters are receiving standard list blasts. They also made an effort “to include a lot more videos in our e-mail communications–the data suggested that supporters spent more time with these e-mails than with the text-only versions.” By constantly tracking what was and wasn’t working in their e-mail messaging they were able to keep improving their game over the long campaign.

The campaign also learned that using e-mail to share campaign strategy with supporters helped strengthen the sense of purpose and discipline with supporters:

What we found when we researched things a bit more was that we were not doing enough internal communication to ensure that our supporters, and even staff, knew exactly what our strategy was and how their efforts fit into the puzzle.

This internal communication allowed everyone that was involved in the campaign to be on message and as effective as possible when talking to friends, neighbors, and other potential voters:

Through e-mailed talking points, postings on the website, and conversations with local field organizers, our volunteers were stressing the same arguments Obama, Biden, Ax, and Gibbs were delivering on any given day. Our philosophy was that John from Durango needed to be as current on the campaign as the candidate was. We wanted to build a message-delivery army in perfect harmony from top to bottom.

Online Video and Live-Streaming

Online video has become a game-changer in politics, and the Obama campaign’s understanding of the importance of the medium and willingness to experiment allowed them to consistently bypass the media filter and go directly to supporters.

As was the case throughout the campaign, most people did not watch the speech on TV. It was delivered on a Tuesday morning, when just about everyone was at work. Instead, people watched it online, most of them on YouTube, either as it was happening or at their leisure later that day or in the days to come. Eventually, tens of millions of voters saw the speech through various outlets.

This marked a fundamental change in political coverage and message consumption, and one that will only continue as technology rolls forward: big moments, political or otherwise, will no longer be remembered by people as times when everyone gathered around TVs to watch a speech, press conference, or other event. Increasingly, most of us will recall firing up the computer, searching for a video, and watching it at home or at the office–or even on cell phones.

The campaign used live-streaming both to give supporters the opportunity to see events live from across the country and to turn the campaign website into a “real ‘home’ for our supporters and a one-stop shopping place for anything campaign related.”

An interesting lesson the campaign learned was the importance of authenticity in online video. After putting out a video with webcam picture quality, they “tried the next one with better lighting and an actual high-definition camera. The results looked much more produced. Our supporters hated it. They thought it seemed inauthentic, staged, and less personal.” By being authentic, transparent, and honest with supporters in their videos, they were able to get great results:

This was not a mere tactic to get more money or volunteer time. It was what we believed. This video message was one of the most effective ones we sent; the response factors we could measure–contributions, spike in volunteer hours–unmistakably bore this out, but we also received a lot of anecdotal feedback from our staff in the states and in conversations our supporters were having with Chris Hughes’s online organizing team. People felt like they were being leveled with, that we were explaining clearly how their time and money was being utilized. And they felt that we valued and needed them.

List-Building and Events

The Obama campaign viewed every event as a list-building opportunity. This gave the campaign a huge advantage because of the size of the crowds that Obama was able to draw. By having people RSVP for events ahead of time and checking in at the event they built their list and were able to trace people back to the voter file. Of course, this opportunity only presented itself at their own events:

So while candidates were thrilled to have a big audience to speak to at an existing event, we were more interested in building events that would feed into our specific voter targets and that included trying to attract a lot of people who do not like to pay to go to a political event.

The campaign chose to put the additional work in to create their own events instead of taking the easy way out by attending existing fundraising dinners and state party events. By holding events in areas where a lot of unactivated potential Obama supporters could attend, many times in locations that were not used to seeing candidates personally, the campaign was able to sign up new voters and further expand the electorate.

Supporters were told “that nothing was more important than getting additional people signed up on the site so we could communicate with them and try to convert them to donors and volunteers.” The list was able to grow organically as supporters, through peer-to-peer contact, recruited new supporters who then did the same.

The Role of Technology in Staff

Plouffe’s view of the role of ‘new media’ within the campaign structure really resonated with me:

The new media group (online communications, Web-page development and maintenance, texting) in most campaigns reports to the communications department, and its department head is not considered an equal of other senior staff. But I saw how important the burgeoning online world was to our overall success; new media would touch just about every aspect of our campaign. So I had that department report directly to me.

Having been the person in that role in the past, his take on it is 100% accurate. I also agree with his following prediction: “I assume in future campaigns this department will be called digital strategy, not new media–it’s not new anymore and it’s not just media.”

As we have seen technology played a integral role in the campaign at every level of organization and strategy. Both internal and external communication, list-building, field and voter contact, GOTV, finance; all these areas were bolstered by the effective use of technology.

Also check out Learning from Obama: Lessons for Online Communicators in 2009 and Beyond by Colin Delany.

• 0 Comments

The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama’s Historic Victory

Those of us in the progressive youth movement have been talking about the importance of young voter outreach for a long time now. We tried to drive home the point that young voters are not apathetic, but disengaged due to that self-fulfilling prophecy of traditional campaign ‘wisdom.’ Youth political organizations kept succeeding, increasing youth turnout in 2004 and 2006. David Plouffe, David Axelrod, and Barack Obama eschewed tradition by deciding from the beginning that organizing young voters to expand the electorate would be the key to victory.

“One of [Paul] Tewes’s ideas was to make sure we were working every community, no matter how small. African American, Latino, high school kids, Republicans–we had staff assigned to all of the demographics, months ahead of our competition.” The Obama campaign began by working hard to turn out the potential voters that traditional campaigns write off. While critics of the youth vote claim that 2008 was a fluke and just about Obama, it is clear that the campaign worked hard to organize youth that had never been asked for their vote by a campaign. The campaign knew that they “would win Iowa only on the backs of independents, Republicans, young voters, and new registrants–a scary proposition, to say the least.”

The campaign was able to look at the election through the lens of a young voter. “At least 95 percent of our six thousand employees were under the age of thirty, most under the age of twenty-five.” While it is not uncommon for a lot of campaign staff to be young, what was exceptional about the Obama campaign was the respect for them and the willingness to trust their instincts on what was happening on the ground.

We adjusted accordingly, adding more media and Internet advertising geared exclusively to younger voters; we prepared to do a lot more instructional and informative work with our supporters so they knew how to caucus, while trying not to spook them; and we redoubled our efforts to attract support from conventional caucus Democrats so our newbies in certain precincts were matched with some grizzled veterans.

The campaign invested in “advertising specifically geared toward women, seniors, and younger voters, African Americans and Latinos.” The messaging of the youth advertising reflected an understanding of the generation: “spots for those under thirty were very aspirational, a call to action, focusing on issues like Iraq and the environment, and calling on younger voters to get involved in shaping the future.” Young voters, used to being ignored, were finally being engaged by a campaign with the same effort and respect showed to seniors.

The Obama campaign conceived of and executed a strategy to expand the electorate by registering and turning out young voters and other traditionally underrepresented demographics. Here are a few passages from The Audacity to Win on how this strategy became a winning one:

As the returns came in we could see the traces of our strategy’s design: by registering over one hundred thousand new voters, producing strong turnout among African Americans and young voters, and winning college-educated whites thanks to our stand against the gas tax, we had made ourselves unbeatable in North Carolina.

We registered many thousands of new voters in both states, and these voters participated at high rates, defying the conventional view that new registrants turn out in very low numbers. A strong showing from African Americans and younger voters might put both these states in play in the general election.

If we did not register enough African Americans and young voters in North Carolina and then turn them out on Election Day, we could not win. Facing a traditional electorate meant we shouldn’t even bother with a state like North Carolina, no matter how much money we spent.

By focusing their attention on young voters and actually spending resources on research, the campaign learned new things about new and young voters. An example was when their numbers showed that they were not meeting their initial goals for youth early voting:

First, many young voters were so excited by this election that they couldn’t envision doing anything besides voting for Barack Obama in person at the polling location. When we raised with them the possibility of long lines, or the potential to free themselves up to volunteer, they simply wouldn’t budge. This was a big moment for them and they felt it would seem bigger if they voted at the polls. In any case, they were still dead-set on participating, which relieved us.

The second lesson was that there was still some confusion about who was eligible to vote early and how it worked. Armed with these findings, we made sure our communications to younger voters included even more remedial information about the nuts and bolts of early voting. Soon enough, their numbers began to climb. In many states we lowered our expectations for the under-twenty-five early vote (but not for overall turnout), and we eventually hit those numbers in most battlegrounds.

Republicans have spent a lot of effort in previous campaigns spreading misinformation to young voters about such things as early voting, residency, and registration. By putting in the effort to combat that misinformation, the campaign was able to empower and turn out voters who were unsure of the sometimes complex election laws.

As we now know, this strategy of reaching out to young voters paid off, despite the naysayers from the media and the old school political establishment:

Our base–African Americans, sporadic-voting Democrats, and younger voters–was turning out in larger numbers than McCain’s base in most states.

The share of the electorate over sixty-five actually dropped between 2004 and 2008, not because fewer older voters turned out but because younger ones showed up in droves.

Because the Obama campaign was committed to putting effort and resources in registering and turning out young voters, treating them with the same respect as other demographics, they were able to build on the work done by youth organizations since 2000 to culminate with those voters carrying Obama to victory and the presidency. However, culminate may not be the appropriate word. The work in further expanding the electorate by turning out young voters to elect Democrats is far from over. There is more potential for the Millennial generation to not only expand the electorate in an election, but to fundamentally alter the country for the better.

I’ll leave you with David Plouffe’s words on our generation:

I left the campaign extraordinarily confident about the future of the country, because of the talent and drive of the young men and women who made our victory possible. Certainly, we would not have won the primary or the general without a surging youth turnout in any number of states, Iowa most importantly. But their impact on the election goes beyond casting ballots. Most of our staff was under thirty, many of them were under twenty-five, as were a sizable chunk of our most active volunteers. As I witnessed, sometimes in awe, their performance and desire to look beyond themselves and contribute to a better world (and they have a distinctly global outlook) it gave me extreme comfort to know that in the not so distant future they will be taking the reins and leading our companies, campaigns, and institutions. For my generation, the rocking chair beckons–these kids are that good. I can’t wait to experience their leadership and vision in the years to come.

• 2 Comments

Back in May I wrote a long article about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the need to do justice to our gay and lesbian military heroes. As of today, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is still in effect, and activists from across the country marched together in Washington to support equality.

At the HRC dinner President Obama reaffirmed his commitment to end DADT, yet many activists are skeptical, and with good reason. As I discussed in my article, the gay and lesbian community has often been promised things from elected officials that they supported, only to have those items pushed back, ignored, and sometimes even opposed because of fear of the right wing.

The Millennial Generation overwhelming supports equality. The servicemembers who are being victimized by the DADT policy, which includes straight women, are mostly members of this generation. The government asks American youth to risk their lives at war, yet continues to disrespect the service of so many.

The country is ready to end this policy, and every day that the administration postpones action more young patriots will suffer.

• 0 Comments

Conservatives are freaking out because President Obama wants to tell kids to stay in school, obviously a part of the socialist marxist liberal Democratic agenda. Florida GOP Chairman Jim Greer, who apparently stayed in school but didn’t learn anything, had the following to say:

“The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the president justify his plans … is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power.”

Of course, President Obama justifying his plans for America’s youth to work hard and succeed has no place in the classroom. Not only that, his life story of being a poor mixed-race child in a single parent home and through hard work and education becoming the first black President of the United States is far too relevant and inspirational, and would likely create “a cult of personality.”

Conservatives, members of Ronald Reagan’s personality cult, should ask themselves “What Would Reagan Do?”
Actually, we know what he would do, because he did it on November 14, 1988 to junior high students. The difference is that Reagan actually did give a speech that conservative criticism seems to describe perfectly.

Let’s take a look (all emphasis mine):

We also find that more countries than ever before are following America’s revolutionary economic message of free enterprise, low taxes, and open world trade. These days, whenever I see foreign leaders, they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes and other economic reforms that they’re using, copying what we have done here in our country. I wonder if they realize that this vision of economic freedom — the freedom to work, to create and produce, to own and use property without the interference of the state — was central to the American Revolution when the American colonists rebelled against a whole web of economic restrictions, taxes, and barriers to free trade. The message at the Boston Tea Party — have you studied yet in history about the Boston Tea Party, where, because of a tax, they went down and dumped the tea in the harbor? Well, that was America’s original tax revolt. And it was the fruits of our labor — belonged to us, and not to the state. And that truth is fundamental to both liberty and prosperity.

That seemed a lot like President Reagan justifying his agenda and telling kids that taxes are bad and everyone in the world knows it. And of course there is a tea party reference.

The basic values of faith and family will be just as true when people are living on distant planets as they are today. So, for America to gain greatest benefit from all the exciting new technologies that lie ahead, we will also need to reaffirm our traditional moral values, because these values are the foundation on which everything we do is built. So, yes, I would encourage you to study the math and science that are at the basis of the new technologies. But in a world of change you also need to pay attention to the moral and spiritual values that will stay with you, unchanged, throughout a long lifetime.

Traditional moral and spiritual values? That doesn’t sound like a conservative platform plank or anything.

And, again, I would say that the most important thing you can do is to ground yourself in the ideas and values of the American Revolution. And that is a vision that goes beyond economics and politics. It’s also a moral vision, grounded in the reverence and faith of those who believed that with God’s help they could create a free and democratic nation. They designed a system of limited government that, in John Adams’ words, was suited only to a religious people such as ours. Our Founding Fathers were the descendents of the Pilgrims — men and women who came to America seeking freedom of worship — who prospered here and offered a prayer of thanksgiving, something we’ve continued to do each year, and so that we’ll do it again on Thursday of next week.

And children, remember that we are a Christian nation and the only reason our democracy works is because we are so Christian. Jesus wants us to have a limited government.

This speech is encompasses everything that conservatives are accusing President Obama of doing, yet President Obama is only speaking about staying in school and working hard, something President George H.W. Bush did in 1991.

The Republican Party over the last decade has attempted to declare a monopoly on patriotism, yet take actions that are as unpatriotic as anything seen in a generation. It’s time to stop being afraid of Republicans and conservatives and actually start to do those things Democrats were elected to do.

• 1 Comment

Health insurance hasn’t always been the sexiest issue for young Americans, but as the Millennial generation enters the work force (or tries to) we are realizing just how important it is.

President Obama’s plan for health insurance reform will have an immediate positive impact for young Americans.

• Lowers costs by putting a cap on what insurance companies can force you to pay in out of pocket expenses, co-pays and deductibles. It also eliminates yearly and life-time limits on how much insurance companies cover if you get sick. A car accident or cancer diagnosis shouldn’t force you to live your entire life in debt.
• Special young adult policies that will be offered by private insurance plans and a competitive public option. You will have increased choices and increased competition that holds private insurance companies accountable.
• Millennials frequently changes jobs, move, or hold part-time or temporary jobs. Under reform, it doesn’t matter – you will always have choices of quality, affordable health insurance.
• Health insurance reform will allow you to stay on your parents’ health care plans until you’re 26. This will help to cover the one in three young adults who are uninsured.
• Young Americans are just starting out in their jobs and careers, and they often don’t have access to job-based coverage. Even when they do, they often don’t have the money to spend on expensive health insurance. Health care reform will offer health insurance to those without job-based coverage and provide premium assistance to those who still can’t afford it.

We must continue our effort to bring real health care reform. Stand with President Obama and voice your support.

Photo by seiuhealthcare775nw

• 2 Comments

Today I submitted the following resolution to the Young Democrats of America for consideration by the National Committee in Houston.

The Young Democrats of America:

WHEREAS the current “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is a form of government sponsored discrimination against gay and lesbian citizens;

DEEPLY REGRETTING that openly gay and lesbian Americans are unable to serve their country, despite qualifications and skills desperately needed in the United States armed forces;

TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION the courageous gay and lesbian Americans such as Jay Hatheway, Leonard Matlovich, Miriam Ben-Shalom, Perry Watkins, Jim Woodward, Paul Thomasson, and Sandy Tsao who have fought for decades to end this policy, sacrificing their careers, their livelihoods, and even their safety for the cause of equality;

NOTING WITH DEEP CONCERN that Lt. Dan Choi, an Army officer, West Point graduate, and Arabic linguist, has been discharged from the Army solely for his sexuality, despite the shortage of servicemembers with his skills;

FURTHER NOTING that the majority of American citizens believe that it is time to end this antiquated and unjust policy;

EMPHASIZING that President Barack Obama pledged to repeal the military ban during the 2008 presidential campaign;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Young Democrats of America encourages President Obama and Congress to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and allow gay and lesbians to serve openly in the military;

FURTHER RESOLVED that the Young Democrats of America will send a copy of this resolution to President Barack Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

• 1 Comment

Today, we witnessed history as Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States.

We are lucky to have an ally like President Obama in the White House. To him, change and hope and progress are a way of life, not just a slogan. He made an unprecedented commitment to involving young people in politics and now it’s our turn to say thank you.

We want one million young voters to say thank you.

Today was not the only historic moment for us though. On November 4th, we witnessed a historic shift in the electorate, as Millennials turned out in force and changed politics for a generation.

The Young Voter Revolution continues. All of the energy and momentum we saw across the country, up and down the ballot, was just the beginning. We learned an important lesson though – we have to made our presence known and felt in big numbers to change the conventional wisdom.

Now it’s time to prove 2008 is a trend, not a fluke. We need to show the world that young voters will be engaged on key policy issues in the months to come and over the next four years. We need to show we are a political powerhouse.

We want one million young voters to prove that the Young Voter Revolution continues! Sign today!

And take a moment to thank yourself. YOU – and millions of your friends – made this moment possible. PASS IT ON and keep the momentum going.

Alexandra Acker
Executive Director
Young Democrats of America

• 1 Comment

• 0 Comments

• 0 Comments