Your opinions matter more than you think

Four years ago, youth voter turnout reached a record high across the nation during the presidential election. At the time, scholars lauded the phenomenon as a “tidal wave” of civic engagement and a major turning point for the youth demographic more generally. Now, election season is upon us yet again, and nearly 8 million new voters have come of age. Given the ever-changing landscape of our electorate, along with the recent surge in campus activism, it comes as no surprise that universities are once more thrust into the crosshairs of our national discourse.

As November approaches, headlines have increasingly concentrated on the major role that college students will play in the upcoming election, with as many as 700 institutions — Princeton included — committing to an “All In” Campus Democracy Challenge to elevate student voices. But as the election begins to loom in the distance, I wonder if all young electors are prepared to cast their ballot. With the election looming in the distance, we ought to pay careful attention to how political discourse on campus, or lack thereof, will shape the voter turnout in November.

Despite past statistics, concerns about student voter turnout for the 2024 Presidential election persist. A decline in the 2022 gubernatorial elections, where the youth vote polled as low as 23 percent across the nation (and only reached 20.6 percent in New Jersey) appears to suggest that the 2020 surge in youth participation may represent an irregular deviation, as opposed to the beginning of a new trend. Although Princeton’s 2020 turnout ranged well above the national average at a rate of 75 percent, many young voters at the time benefited from pandemic-related leniencies and COVID-19-era absentee ballot policies that worked to enhance the turnout across the nation. This further deviates with historical trends of Princeton voters, whose turnout has traditionally ranged lower, around 50.5 percent in the 2016 election and 10.5 percent in 2014. Although many voters aged 18–34 indicate a strong likelihood of voting in the upcoming general election, many feel disheartened by the lack of outreach from their local or state political campaigns and community organizations. This issue is made especially pertinent in regards to the lacking dialogue on campus.

Often, lacking participation in an election tends to be attributed to voter apathy and disillusionment among the populace. This correlation is particularly prominent in relation to younger voters. Although several broader factors may act to dissuade student voters, such as an insufficient electoral education or a lack of accessible polling places, new studies indicate that pluralistic ignorance may also play a role in low voter turnout.

As a term in social psychology, pluralistic ignorance refers to a cognitive bias where an individual is led to believe that their thoughts, opinions, or private beliefs may drastically differ from that of the people around them. Consequently, individuals may preemptively alter or suppress themselves in favor of conforming to the perceived majority. This phenomenon of second-order conformity is particularly prominent within large group interactions, such as voting. Just as voter mobilization is often orientedalong societal norms, the perceived “will of the majority” may subconsciously work to prevent voters from casting a ballot or supporting a policy, especially if it is deemed to be the “incorrect” choice in the public eye. After all, if these students feel as though their vote will not have a significant impact within the larger majority of their peers, why would they be driven to vote at all?

College campuses across the nation are not immune to the potential effects of pluralistic ignorance. Approximately one in five of Princeton’s graduating seniors reported that they do not feel particularly comfortable in sharing their personal views within the broader circle of the student body.

This effect can become even more relevant within smaller ponds of select political and affiliate identity groups, where people might feel stifled by the perceived conventions or beliefs of their peers. Pluralistic ignorance presents obstacles across bipartisan lines and tends to have different implications for different groups as a result. For example, American conservatives tend to underestimate support for policies that they have personal qualms with, and consequently, have a false impression of the actual consensus. Even as Princeton is frequently noted to be the most conservative among the Ivy Leagues, the perception of the University as a “liberal space” may cause many conservative students to feel uncomfortable about sharing their perspectives with their peers.

Unless we confront pluralistic ignorance first and foremost, I believe that this social phenomenon might pose a risk to election polling on campus in the months to come. Students who feel that their political positions are not well represented on campus might accordingly feel a sense of apathy towards an electoral process that they do not feel will sufficiently impact those around them.

Over the course of the past decade, the University has taken several steps to further facilitate the voting process and promote the student vote. In addition to the official establishment of “Tiger Ballot Day” in 2020, the Pace Center for Civic Engagement boasts a wide array of pedagogical resources to aid voters who might be unfamiliar with the nuances of the process. Student associations have also taken matters into their own hands. Both partisan and nonpartisan student groups have advanced canvassing efforts and prioritized direct forms of “Get The Vote Out” (GTVO) outreach. As of Sept. 17, Vote100 fellows and ODUS staff registered over 100 students in a mass effort to build student voting interest. Certainly, the Princeton community always makes a “good faith effort” to expand access and efforts for voter registration prior to the national deadline.

However, there is more work to be done. Beyond the physical act of ballot-casting, I believe that students should examine their political opinions first and foremost. Beyond formalized outlets of SPIA panels and Whig-Clio speaker events, I challenge and urge Princeton students to overcome the sense of implicit hesitation and trepidation that comes with engaging in discourse. In the classroom, in casual discussion, and at the polling place, do not let a sense of political isolation discourage you from casting your ballot. This is all the more relevant as political polarization continues to heighten across party lines and as students may feel the need to suppress their opinions accordingly. Come November, I hope I can count on a new wave of change in our socio-political culture and, more importantly, I hope I can count on your vote.

Wynne Conger is a sophomore and prospective SPIA major from Bryn Mawr, Pa. She can be reached by email at wc2918[at]princeton.edu. Her column "Popping the Bubble" runs every three weeks on Thursday. You can read all of her columns here.