Young people get a publicity bump around election time. Efforts like MTV's "Rock the Vote" and Michael Moore's "Slacker Uprising Tour" have sought to increase voter participation among young people. The Boston Globe reports that:

"Spurred into action by the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq, youths 18 to 24 years of age have dramatically accelerated their participation in politics, both at the ballot box and on college campuses" – 47 percent for the 2004 presidential election, up from 36 percent in 2000. Which 2008 candidates would benefit from added youth interest?

News coverage indicates that Barack Obama (outlasting a challenge by John Edwards) and Rudy Giuliani are the winners here. "Young voters favor (Obama) among the Democratic contenders and Giuliani among the GOP candidates, according to (an) Institute of Politics survey," the Globe reports.

Is courting young voters a quixotic goal, though? Election-Day mainstays include senior citizens concerned over issues that directly affect them, such as Social Security and Medicare, two big topics in 2000. Yes, 9/11 and the Iraq War have drastically changed our nation. But because we do not have a draft, young people are not immediately affected by the War on Terror unless they volunteer to join the military or know someone who has.

If candidates and political parties continue addressing topics like student loans, however, the youthful enthusiasm over Obama, Giuliani, and maybe Edwards might translate into even more votes.

A new 7News-Suffolk poll says that 56 percent of Massachusetts registered voters want to give someone else a shot at John Kerry's Senate seat. Only 37 percent say he should run again.

This is clearly bad news for Kerry, and, according the Boston Herald's Wayne Woodlief, "very good news for any well-heeled Republican who might try a run against Long Jawn. Or even for somebody who isn't rich but is [...] 'an aggressive, strong politician' who could see the national GOP open its coffers if Kerry's numbers stay that low. Especially with control of the Senate at stake."

Sure, this offers a very small glimmer of hope for the Massachusetts Republican Party. But, Kerry's vulnerability may also inspire some Massachusetts congressmen with large campaign coffers to take Kerry out in the primaries. Now, if Kerry survives the primaries and the Mass GOP offers a viable candidate to oppose him, the seat could very well become competitive... certainly the most competitive race for Kerry in quite some time.

On the Labor Agenda:

• Wants changes in the Medicare prescription drug program to introduce price negotiations with pharmaceutical companies.

• Seeks to change bankruptcy laws that allow companies to abandon pension and health care commitments to workers.

• Opposes trade agreements that don't protect workers' rights.

This coincides nicely with what Dem Majority leader Harry Reid wants. The trade thing will be the trickiest. Will Hillary Clinton, whose husband promoted and passed NAFTA, side with the free-traders or the unions? Her presidential nomination hangs in the balance.

Some folks like yours truly, wondered if the big 2005 split in the labor ranks would lead to less cooperation and cripple the political effort. Apparently not. The above article reports that the breakaway unions managed their own efforts and coordinated with the AFL-CIO. In either case the unions are solidly Democratic and anti-Bush above all else.

The dog that isn't barking is the immigration issue. I find it hard to believe that the unions are finding nothing to say about President Bush's effort to push a comprehensive bill through that includes some form of amnesty. It appears from this article anyway, that unions are prepared to give their Democratic allies a free pass on immigration and amnesty.

I had some free time this afternoon, so I thought I'd stop by Harvard, my old alma mater. Six years after graduating, I found out that while music and fashion trends may change, liberal politics never goes out of style.

Undergrads touted t-shirts for the upcoming Harvard-Yale game (Harvard grads know it simply as "The Game") making fun of the New Haven school for giving us President Bush. Posters advertised an evening of celebrating Rummy's resignation. If students need to fill up more space on their calendars, there's always the protests on Friday for Gen. John Abizaid's speech. (He's the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East.)

Voters under 30 were the sole age group that John Kerry won in 2004. Based on my observations from today, young people will continue to vote overwhelmingly Democratic in future elections.

That's how many of us voted yesterday. The number gets a little less impressive when you consider it's only a 40.4 percent turnout. (Many European countries regularly see 70 and 80 percent and up.) Still, by America's already low standard, we've improved: in 2002 we saw only 39.7 percent of registered voters head to the polls.

A preliminary analysis showed that turnout was down in some states and higher in others - notably up in Virginia, where it appeared more people voted than in any midterm in the state before

The highest recent midterm turnout was 42.1 percent in 1982.

With all the recent talk from the left-wing and some moderate Democrats about the supposed Bush dictatorship and skewed elections, we saw true democracy in action yesterday. There were no Rove/Diebold conspiracies or subversion-of-democracy tactics employed by the "Bush hegemony." We have what the Founding Fathers intended: checks and balances in the government.

Candidates made their cases, voters listened and made decisions based on issues they hold dear. They voted for the candidate they think is the best on those issues. Whether it was the war in Iraq, the environment, healthcare, abortion or whatever, it was pure American democracy.

Will there be healing anytime soon? I doubt it. We are still hyper partisan, as can be seen by reading anyone of the comment threads on this blog. The 10% of the population that make up the hardcore right and left will still battle it out for the hearts and minds of the other 80% who aren't as jacked up about politics.

We saw America at its finest yesterday: a nation that is passionate about where are country is and where we are going. Gos bless America. More thoughts along these lines here.

Delay. Abramoff. Ney. Foley. And on and on. This election cycle the voters made it clear that they were just sick of all the scandals in Washington and they voted accordingly.

Exit polling indicated that this theme resonated strongly with voters, who told a consortium of news media interviewers that they disapproved of the way Congress is handling its job (61 percent) and described "corruption and scandals in government" as either very or extremely important factors in their vote (74 percent).

Seventy-four percent. In the world of elections that is a huge number. And it speaks volumes that voters named corruption as a bigger concern than terrorism, immigration and abortion.

I was writing a post similar to David's when he posted. The numbers he supplies are astounding but not completely unexpected.

The reason Evangelicals--or more specifically Conservative Christians--didn't support the GOP with their usual vigor was because Republicans ran scared and not as conservatives. It's a tightrope walk when running in states that don't have a strong conservative base and the candidates in those states have to take stands that the Christian Conservatives can't support.

The Christian vote is overrated in my opinion, but perhaps the election autopsy will prove me wrong.

You can follow the dirty tricks, vandalism, voter suppression tactics and other assorted uglys on some of the other diaries but this one is about things that didn't happen this election year (unless we just don't know about them):

-There was no major October Surprise (such as starting a war with Iran or Syria).

-No major problems (yet) with voting machines.

-The sky is not falling, the election is taking place and we'll probably have results later tonight.

This is all good news but there are issues out there. Not too many like these election machines. Many Dems and Reps do not like the lack of a paper trail. My understanding is they're cheap and can be hacked. So, what would be a solution?

More on the flip.

Here's a sketchbook-style look at how the morning unfolded in the Massachusetts governor's race between Republican Kerry Healey and Democrat Deval Patrick.

Campaign sources have alerted me to the following regarding turnout in Pennsylvania:

• Turn out appears to be high across the state of Pennsylvania. Philly is low at this point.
• There are reports that Congressman Brady and local Dems would not let GOP poll watchers into the 19th Ward of Philadelphia today.
• There are massive problems with machines across the state. Lebanon and Allegheny Counties seem to be the worst right now.
• The 4th CD, Melissa Hart's district, is reporting very high turnout perhaps near 20% already.
• Harrisburg and Philly seem light thus far.
• Some local problems with Dem material too close to the polls, but no major instances or fraud or violence yet.

Some recent polls, including a Rendell internal poll have the Santorum/Casey Senate race at 5 points... Could turnout help deliver a victory for Santorum?

Several pieces of good news for Tom Kean, Jr. today. First, it's not raining. The significance of that is that if it were, alot of the construction sites would be shut down and the union laborers and operators would be sent out in force to drive people to polls. etc.

Two, the commercial building industry is solid now, which means that most union peole are working and not hanging around the hall with nothing to do. When work is slow, they need to find something for those out of work to do.

The polls in New Jersey have opened up to usher in the start of another election day. Nearly 60% of us will not even bother to vote leaving 40% of us to decide what is best for the country moving forward.

Of the minority who do vote, I'd wager that fully half of them follow politics closely. Of that 20%, I'd reckon that half of them are the political junkies that read this and other blogs. We are the ones who have Real Clear Politics in our favorites and know the historic relevance of Zogby polls and the Washington Redskins. We know how to read polls and to tell if the sampling was correct or not. Today is our Superbowl, World Series and Stanley Cup finals in one day.

According to a report on population figures from the 2000 U.S. Census and the 2004 presidential election results, about 42 percent of the country didn't vote; 87 million people over the age of 18. In the 2002 midterm election this number shot to 65 percent; 135 million people over the age of 18.

The reasons?

1) Two party system offers little choice -- both are owned by the rich and powerful.
2) All politicians are crooks and/or liars.
3) My vote won't change anything ... its rigged.
4) Politics are BS.

I agree with the first two. And after the stolen election of 2000 between Gore and Bush I understand number three. That in turn gives credence to number four, a direct result of those three.

But there's a monstrous reason to vote this time: To stop the killing of the men and women in Iraq.

What region of the country will be most important for the Republicans tomorrow? The South.

After all, the defining image of the Republican Revolution of 1994 was Newt Gingrich of Georgia becoming Speaker of the House. And the defining image of the GOP's 2002 recapture of the Senate was a triple amputee and war hero, Max Cleland, losing his re-election campaign to Saxby Chambliss, also in Georgia.

The Boston Globe explains the Republican "firewall strategy" of 2006:

"The strategy anticipates Democratic gains in the liberal Northeast and in pockets of the economically struggling Midwest. But it also assumes that with gushers of ad money and a blitz of campaign appearances by Bush and other prominent Republicans, the party can erect a "firewall" around its Southern base."

I wrote in a previous post that campaign appearances with an unpopular president are the wrong strategy. But RNC chairman Ken Mehlman has a better, more basic idea: He "crisscrossed the state this week to inspect his party's vaunted get-out-the-vote organization," the Globe reports. Smart thinking.