Claire Thompson thinks the principal driver is disappointment with the political system:
Youth disillusionment with politics is nothing new. But for the generation that propelled Obama to victory, the hope-filled high of his campaign and election has had a particularly rough comedown. A Harvard Institute of Politics survey [PDF] found, in December of last year, that young Americans aged 18-29 believe, by a 4-to-1 ratio, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. That’s up from a 2-to-1 ratio in March 2011. As the blogosphere relentlessly warns, this increasingly bleak outlook could have consequences for Obama: The Harvard survey reported an 11-percent drop from late 2007 in the number of 18- to 24-year-old voters who said they’d “definitely” be voting in this election (61 percent to 50 percent). As if to fulfill the prophecy of their inaction, more young voters believe Obama will lose reelection than win (36 percent to 30 percent; 32 percent are not sure).
I don't agree. I think Paul's attraction is his obvious sincerity, his seeming so unlike the other opportunists surrounding him. But above all, I think it's his foreign policy. The post-9/11 generation has seen what war has achieved – virtually nothing but the death of a hundred thousand Iraqis, 5,000 Americans and tens of thousands of maimed and injured vets – and believe the wars were huge errors. They also rightly understand that the world has changed thanks to globalization of capitalism, and see the Cold War mentality of America policing the planet to be at least condescending, and at worst utterly counter-productive and unaffordable. They see their retirement savings disappearing to fuel neocon fantasies of permanent war.
Then there's the insane war on drugs. Paul is the only person, including the cowardly Obama, to take this issue on. The young know it's failed, and that it's racist, punitive and irrational.
That's why Paul does so well with the young. It's not the Fed. It's the war on Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on drugs.
The Dish 