I must say that the comparison between Cameron and Obama reminds me of when the National Post tried to sell Stockwell Day as the new Trudeau. I don’t think that the fact that two candidates are both young and are both calling for change (which all non-incumbents do anyhow) can outweigh the fact that one is obsessed with free markets and small government, while the other (both Obama and Trudeau) fundamentally believes in the strengthening of shared institutions.

I am a university student, heavily involved in politics, who lived in the UK for four months last summer. I think that Obama has been the most popular candidate amongst youth across Canada, Britain, and the US because his beliefs, experience, and character come far closer to what we want in a leader than pretty much any other politicians we have encountered.

That being said, Obama’s use of technology has definitely been part of his comparative advantage. By going to his website you can join “the movement.” As part of the online community you can meet supporters, ask questions, learn about campaign events, donate money, and canvass with phone numbers and addresses taken off the website. This is a great way for keeping volunteers informed, organized, and motivated. Obama’s web community probably wouldn’t get as much use if it were not for the number of youth in his campaign. But without the same level of technology, a lot of youth would probably be much less involved. It is a very important tool for engaging young people in the campaign.

Another interesting thing is how different generations follow the campaign. When my generation wants to find out about a candidate, the first (and likely only) thing we’ll do is watch videos of them online. The first place we go to look for videos is the candidate’s website. If that website has easy to find, easy to use, and informative content it will be our main source of information about the candidate. Obama does this really well. Most of my friends, few of whom are able to vote, and regardless of whether they support Obama, have seen a huge amount of his official videos. This allows him to have much more control over his message.

Everyone I talk to seems to agree that Hillary’s videos just suck. They are full of “behind the scenes” footage of volunteers setting events. No one wants to watch that. And she makes the fatal mistake of attacking Obama on issues he’s already addressed in past videos. Even though the two candidates might not put out videos in direct response to each other, those watching at home are likely to interpret them as a debate. The worst thing a candidate can do in a debate is to appear as if they can’t listen.

I think candidates in all three countries could learn a lot from Obama about how to use new technologies to engage youth. What I think is really crazy is that, according to alexa, Obama’s website has been more popular than Clinton’s since the start of the campaign over a year ago, even though Clinton was the front runner until January. I wonder if you could use traffic patterns on candidates’ websites to predict election outcomes?