It seems to be a tradition of each generation of youth to rebel against the status quo and push for change. Despite our characterization as the "quiet generation," today's youth are no different. Furthermore, we are calling for change more than ever -- we are at war, the economy looks troubled, and global warming will have serious consequences for our generation if not older generations.
Despite believing that we need change and will therefore vote for candidates who promise it, our support for the aforementioned candidates is an age-old revolt against establishment. Unfortunately, this youthful call for change most often rings hollow. Change for change's sake rarely results in viable or successful change.
Neither Democratic candidate truly represents the change that we are calling for. Obama says he is the catalyst for change because he is fresh blood. Youthful, full of dreams and a great orator, he certainly seems to fit the role of reformer. President Clinton was our parents' president; none of us could vote twelve years ago. We don't want another Clinton.
Obama, however, does not have the policies necessary to change the status quo. He talks of a great hope and promises change, but despite the fact that "yes we can," he doesn't tell us how change will be realized outside of his election. The truth is that his policies differ very little from those of Hilary Clinton. Still, we are seduced by the change he represents (or doesn't).
When Clinton says that she is better equipped to change Washington because she has been there longer, we scoff. She surely cannot represent the same change as Obama because she is now part of Washington. We as youth are attached to the concept of radical change from the outside, not the practicality of a presidential candidate.
McCain has consistently upset the conservative right wing of the Republican Party. He promises change away from some of the Bush presidency's policies and indicates he will return us to more of a Reaganesque time. McCain rails against lobbyist corruption and wasteful spending on items such as earmarks and swears he will rail against the special interests groups. McCain actually has the record to back up his ideas for change. For years, he has been working on what he promises. True, the changes McCain proposes are not uber-drastic, but they are changes nonetheless.
But there is more at work than this practical change. Because McCain irks the far right, he appeals to us more as youth. Bush was the darling of the right and of talk radio -- but my dad listens to talk radio, not me. We don't care that McCain is routinely bashed over the airwaves. It reinforces our idea that we need someone different and McCain is our man.
Again, we over-exaggerate the possibility of change with McCain. He is still a Republican and will most likely hold true to the Republican caucus. The appeal of the maverick we see in him is too strong to hold back our votes.
Both of the leading youth-vote candidates represent change in one way or another. Regardless of the facts, our youthful need to cross our parents and push for our own course leads us to back Obama and McCain for the nominations for president of the two major parties in America.
I am disenchanted with the idea of change in politics. Change is a catchy theme -- consistently promised and rarely delivered. We need to realize that the change that both of these candidates bring to the table is superficial. Obama is still the most liberal senator in the Senate. How much change, reconciliation and cooperation will that bring? Little. McCain has a lifetime conservative rating of 82. How much change from conservatism will McCain bring? Little.
The point is that we should focus on who will handle the presidency best, rather than who will change politics the most.
Change is an inspiring concept for many people, especially for us as youth. It is our responsibility to guard ourselves from empty promises and catchy, yet impractical or untrue, themes. We need to focus on what the role of a president is rather than what "change" we would rather see.
