Is Obama to Democrats the new Reagan to Republicans?

The rhetorical legacy that Obama will leave when his term ends this January is indisputable. He is an incredibly well-spoken, charismatic leader that has the ability to relate to everyday people from every generation, specifically millennials. The positive impact and impression that Obama has made amongst the younger generation is key for Clinton making that same connection. It’s no wonder Clinton’s campaign called him “her most popular, top-level surrogate” at a speech in Florida this Thursday, according to an article by the SunSentinel.

Obama is quoted saying “If we win Florida, we will win this election.” His use of “we” throughout his speech puts him side by side with Clinton. It shows the American public, specifically Floridians, his allegiance to the democratic party and to Hillary.

We have discussed in class a lot about the importance of surrogates. According to an article by The Atlantic, “Candidates depend on these individuals, called surrogates, to lend enthusiasm and credibility to a campaign.” Well, who is more credible to young voters than our last POTUS? A leader who has a 62% approval rating amongst those born after 1980, according to an article by Red Alert Politics. Obama is a quintessential authority figure for the younger generation, and his support for Clinton, may mean more support from millenials for Hillary as well.

Obama’s support for Clinton is not the only thing helping her, but so is his disdain for Trump. At a speech in Miami this past Thursday Obama said, “You can’t boo. He [Trump] can’t hear you boo, but he can hear you vote,” he said. “Donald Trump is uniquely unqualified to be president. No, I’m not joking. He is temperamentally unfit to be commander in chief.”

Surrogates have helped Clinton with the millennial vote throughout the entirety of her campaign. Amy Schumer, Jay Z, Ellen DeGeneres, Katy Perry, and Steven Spielberg are only a few examples of famous celebrities who are allegedly #withher, according to an article by Newsway. While I believe that these icons provide Clinton with popularity, I think that Obama gives Clinton the credibility she’s been lacking. Obama made our generation feel valued, important, and powerful; three things that the younger generation is so desperately wanting to feel from Clinton as well. However, with the overflowing support from Obama, I believe that Clinton is beginning to gain the trust from millenials that she needs to win the election.

Hillary Clinton has struggled with winning the millennial vote throughout the majority of her campaign. However, the recent televised debates have done a substantial job in changing the minds of younger voters. According to a poll by Quinnipiac University in mid-September, Clinton had won just 31% of the millennial vote. However, according to another poll by the University in mid October, Clinton was up to 57%. So what changed? The two televised debates that occurred within that period of time.

A majority of millenial’s problems with Clinton was that she comes off as scripted, fake, and hard to relate to. Her attempts at appealing to the millennial vote via social media were, for lack of a better word, cringy, and because of this she lacked substantially in her ability to make young voters feel valued and appreciated. However, the live debates gave Clinton an opportunity to show a side of herself that millenials have been waiting for all along.

In an article by Time, Sam Frizzel writes, “Still, it was in the debates when they [millenials] saw a candidate in her element, a lawyer-by-training who during three 90-minute sessions steadily cut into her opponent, goading him, baiting him and mocking him into making blunders.” Clinton was able to keep her cool in all of the debates, and came off as a strong, intelligent woman who can handle being interrupted and mocked by a man who had little evidence to back up his claims

It was in the debates where Clinton’s rhetorical objectives had very positive effects. Specifically, through her demeanor, practice, and logistical responses she was able to reinforce audience belief structure, modify her image, set the voter agenda and increase knowledge of issues, as well as build confidence in Democracy. Trump’s irrational outbursts and crude comments left voters, specifically undecided voters, feeling annoyed and quite frankly angry that someone so illogical could be running for president. This is how Clinton was able to also shift a limited number of millennial voters to her side.

In an article by New York magazine, Eric Levitz writes, “Harvard political scientist John Della Volpe, who studies youth voting patterns, told the site that a “significant number” of young people hadn’t seen Clinton in a “long format” until the first presidential debate, when “an overwhelming majority of millennials saw her with fresh eyes — and, generally speaking, they liked what they saw.” These presidential debates are the reason for Clinton’s recent surge in millennial support.

It wasn’t her appeals on Snapchat or her strange references to pop culture that won millennial support. It was showing the public her true, somewhat unscripted self, that made her relatable and appealing to the younger generation.

 

Stephen Colbert’s cartoon version of Hillary Clinton might be more relatable to millenials than Clinton herself, certainly funnier. This video sums up why the younger generation is having trouble relating to Clinton. The majority of her appeals to millenials are disingenuous and easily discarded as fake, a quality that Hillary certainly does not need to expand upon throughout the remainder of her campaign. While I do believe it is important for a presidential candidate to reach out and try to relate to people of all ages, I don’t agree with accomplishing this task in an overtly phony manner.

The video shows Hillary wearing a “yas” hat, a “Bernie” t-shirt, and a gold chain, all articles that poke fun at Clinton’s failed attempts at relating to the younger generation. It also shows her using phrases like “bae”, “venmo”, “dog filter on Snapchat” …etc. which are all facets of current pop culture. The pure satire of this video is highly relatable because it shows everything that millenials find pretentious about Clinton. Millenials aren’t stupid, and it’s quite easy for us to tell when people aren’t being genuine. The reality of the matter is that Hillary is a grandmother and anyone of any age can determine that her appeals to the younger generation are drafted by a team of social media managers who quite frankly don’t relate that well to millenials either.

Due to Clinton’s email scandals she has already had trouble defending her integrity as a presidential candidate. A primary rhetorical strategy of her campaign has been to show the American public that she can be trusted. However, she is doing the exact opposite of that in the ways in which she has attempted to win the millennial vote.

The one way Hillary is going to relate to millennial voters is by acting her age and cutting the acts. The younger generation is tired of trying to figure out who Clinton really is. In an article by Wired, Issie Lapowsky writes, “when a candidate’s online persona is so vastly different from his or her offline persona, it creates a kind of cognitive dissonance that turns people off, instead of bringing them in.” In order to win the millenial vote over third party candidates, Clinton needs to stop talking down to us and talk to us. Her rhetoric needs to change, and she needs to address us as adults, rather than mindless teenagers who only care about fads and pop culture.

 

 

69.2 million: the number of qualified voters in the United States between the ages of 18 and 34, according to an article by USA Today. Out of these 69.2 million, 60% said they’d consider voting for a third-party candidate. So what does this mean for Hillary Clinton? Let’s just say, she’s got some work to do.

I would like to focus on the rhetoric that the Clinton campaign has been using to appeal to the
millennial generation, specifically the t-shirts that Hillary’s campaign came out with in the hopes of gaining more support from the younger generation. These new yellow t-shirt’s feature the phrase “Yaaas, Hillary!” and a picture of her face from probably thirty years ago.

This strategy doesn’t make sense coming from a 68-year-old woman who most likely doesn’t even know where or how “yaaas” started. (It was Lady GaGa by the way). Also, using a photo of herself from 30-40 years ago on the shirt sends a false message to her millennial audience. We all know that Hillary is not a young, hip candidate that relates to our generation’s culture, so why pretend? It comes across as insincere and quite frankly, phony.

Realistically, Hillary is a grandmother and her disingenuous attempts to gain support via snapchat, GIF’s, Bitmoji’s…etc. are getting her nowhere. We don’t want the POTUS to pretend to know funny slang or be BFF’s with popular young celebrities. We want a POTUS that will help our futures and make us feel confident in the policies that she is planning to implement.

In an article by In These Times, Kate Aronoff writes, “For the most progressive and diverse generation in history, Trump represents virtually everything our generation is against. Clinton represents everything that hasn’t worked for us.” Hillary needs to step up and show our generation how she is going to help us get out of debt post college, how she is going to redistribute wealth, how she is going to make healthcare affordable and effective…etc. It can’t just be all talk that appeals to every age.

If Hillary does not start going out of her way to show millenials that she is going to make policies specifically for the betterment of our futures, then she is going to lose a lot of millennial votes to either Gary Johnson or Jill Stein. This generation wants to know that we aren’t just pawns in her campaign, but people that she genuinely cares for.

(Source)

Hillary Clinton is a well organized, experienced politician, however, her appeal to the millennial vote is substantially lacking. After reading an article by Mother Jones, I considered more potential reasons why Clinton is not easily obtaining these votes. This article made an argument that the partial reason why millennials are still voting for third party candidates is because Clinton is doing nothing to differentiate her pitch to the younger generation. According to this article her only reasoning is “Elect me because President Donald Trump is too terrifying to fathom.” Honestly, one of the very few direct appeals to our generation was her debt-free college plan. This is obviously a concern for everyone who is currently in or about to enter college, however, you can’t gain the support of an entire generation with just one universally liked idea.

I believe that Clinton is struggling so much to gain these votes because her opponents are trying much harder to appeal to millennials than she is. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are stealing 21% of these votes because they have revolved their campaigns around the values and goals held by our generation. The votes going to these third party candidates are dangerous for Clinton because they could ultimately help Trump. According to the National Review, “If Hillary Clinton loses in November, two reasons will be Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson and Green-party nominee Jill Stein.” Clinton needs to make more direct appeals, specifically to the younger generation, and show them how electing her will positively affect their futures.