Yeah, I want to see numbers on that too. Link please.

Per the census:

18-30 = about 16.5% of the population

65+ = about 12.5%

Here’s a guess:  young voters aren’t getting lots of free stuff from the government.  So what do they have to lose by staying home?

OK, looking for a link.  It was something I heard on ABC last night …

(Abrisaham, are you kosher or not?  Is it a bris or a ham?  Sorry, inside joke.  From an outsider.)

As an amusing byproduct of the search for a link I learned what the World Socialist Web Site thinks of Obama:

A section of the political establishment is attempting to alter the world image of the United States, after eight disastrous years of the Bush administration, and make certain limited shifts in policy. Obama is seen as a useful tool in altering the image of the United States around the world. Hence the clear media bias in his favor in recent weeks. This has intersected with the genuine desire among large sections of the population for a significant change in domestic and foreign policy. At present, this sentiment finds expression in an undefined and vague call for “change,” focused on the personage of Obama, a political unknown only four years ago who would be the first African-American president. If Obama should win the nomination and the presidency, it would not be long before he betrayed these politically naïve expectations and hopes. Indeed, if he emerges over the next month as the presumptive nominee, he will likely be called on by the ruling elite to pick a right-wing running mate with close ties to the military-intelligence apparatus.

As is often the case, a huge youth vote was anticipated:

"They know that their votes really count this time around. Young voters are burying the old assumption that they are too cynical or apathetic to participate in the electoral process," said Marc Morgenstern, Executive Director of Declare Yourself.

This from the San Francisco Chronicle is anecdotal, but discouraging.  After some talk about "Obama fever" and young Clinton supporters’ annoyance with it:

[M]any young people seemed immune to the charms of Obama or any other candidate. On a Manhattan subway car packed with people who turned out for a parade to honor the New York Giants, not a single member of the jersey-wearing crowd voiced an intention to vote. And at the computer bank of the DePaul University student center in Chicago, the nonvoters outnumbered the voters, for a variety of reasons, they said, including failure to register, lack of time and apathy. "I got plenty more years to vote," one student said.

Jeez.  It’s not about you.Yahoo!  News warned on Monday that

varied and confusing deadlines to register to vote could take a toll on the youth turnout. Of the Super Tuesday states, only Minnesota, Idaho (Dem only) and Montana (Repub-only) allow election-day registration (EDR). In the seven states nationwide with EDR, turnout, especially among young voters, has increased dramatically.  

Early deadlines place biggest burden on young voters, particularly students.

If the turnout was low, that certainly accounts for some of the effect.  But I’m having a lot of trouble finding figures, and I’ve got to go.   For the moment I’ll leave you with this:

If the youth didn’t participate at a historic level, Obama might not have done as well as he did, said Ashwin Mudaliar, political director of the Stanford Democrats.

Tully beat me to the quote. How many times does this have to get predicted and then fail to happen before the light bulb goes on? Seriously.  It’s a fake evergreen.                                                                                                                                                                           Young adults just don’t turn out at high rates. When they get married, buy a house, and start paying property taxes, they start voting in higher numbers. When the government starts giving them social security checks and medicare, then you can set your watch by them.  It’s a matter of concrete and tangible motivation, not emotional or political appeals.                                                                                                                                                                               But that’s not as interesting a story as live shots at a spirited campus campus rally, coupled with enthusiastic but grossly unrealistic predictions from people running "get out the youth vote" efforts.       

Er, Iowa was a caucus, not an election. You don’t vote at a caucus, you group in herds–something that comes naturally to the "youth vote." It’s a lot easier to get kids to caucus. Especially at the start of campaign season when the candidates are still bright and shiny. Not the same as dragging them out in November after the mud wars.

Clinton got a boost in ‘92, but it vanished in ‘96. He wasn’t shiny anymore. Youth turned out in 2004 in numbers higher than 1992–but didn’t swing any races, as they were just as split as their elders.