President Obama ran his entire campaign in 2008 around appealing to the youth vote.

Hope and change were themes that appealed to the long-term interests of young voters, and Obama’s oratory and charisma enraptured masses of young people who grew up under the depressing reality of the Bush administration.

Obama’s strategy worked. He won 66 percent of voters between ages 18 to 29, and those votes made 22 percent of his total, according to CNN exit polls.

However, Obama faces a much tougher task this time around.

After four years of an Obama presidency, the general consensus is that change has not been achieved and hope has run out. Obama needs a more concrete plan if he is to control the youth vote the way he did four years ago.

Mitt Romney is also a more attractive candidate to young people than who Obama faced in 2008. John McCain was an old man’s candidate, a Vietnam War hero who represented the values of his aging generation.

Romney has bipartisan experience that will help him appeal to a demographic that historically trends Democratic.

The youth vote could fall at either candidate’s feet this November, and there is a good chance that like 2008, whoever takes it will take the whole election.

So what can the candidates do to attract young voters?

Conventional wisdom says young people are interested in education and higher education funding.

While Obama and Romney laid out similar plans for the nation’s public schools in last week’s debate, they differ on higher education.

The Democratic platform promotes reform of the federal student loan program and expansion of Pell grants. President Obama has also discussed expanding the role of community colleges, especially in career training.

Meanwhile, Romney has hailed the role of private universities as “innovators” while planning to cut funding to public universities and federal student grants.

While Obama’s stance most likely appeals more to college-age voters and those still facing student loan debt, education may not be the most important factor in this election.

University students generally expressed worry that neither candidate focuses enough on issues that will affect the country in the long term, and instead try to get a knee-jerk reaction out of voters.

Garry Gascon, a business freshman, said he has not yet decided who he will vote for, but his dissatisfaction with the two major parties has him leaning towards Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. He believes the current dialogue is overly focused on the economy.

“Issues that matter to me are things like renewable resources and plans for the war,” Gascon said. “I’m frustrated the government is not focused on the future.”

The two campaigns’ overwhelming focuses on economic issues and job creation have largely left students unconvinced. Chemistry senior Malcolm Davidson said focusing on education is the best way to ensure jobs.

“Right now, I’m trying to invest in myself through my education,” Davidson said. “If I work hard and am useful to society, I believe I’ll be able to get a job.”

Other students are equally frustrated with the government and the political climate in general. For some, it is enough to keep them from voting.

Renee LaGarde, a French senior, said she will not vote this election because of corruption and outside influence in government.

“I think politics are corrupt, and I feel like nothing I do is going to have an effect,” LaGarde said. “I’m not educated about political issues because it just depresses me.”

Davidson agreed with her, saying the two-party system has become outdated.

“I’m a liberal person, but I’m leaning towards Romney in this election. Being liberal, being open to new ideas and cultures, doesn’t necessarily make you a Democrat or Republican,” Davidson said. “We need a new party or a new system because what we have now doesn’t meet our needs as a society.”

Student opinions about the future vary from optimistic to cynical and jaded, but the focus of any successful campaign toward youth will have to be change.