Prior to the elections on Nov. 4, I wrote a column encouraging my fellow students to go out and vote.

It wasn’t for the sake of my party, but merely for the sake of democracy. It appears that my words fell on deaf ears, as the young voters’ [ages 18 to 29] share of the electorate was down from 19 percent in 2012 to 13 percent on Tuesday.

This comes as no surprise. In 2010, the turnout of people aged 18 to 24 was a mere 21 percent. Political apathy seems to prevail most in the midterm elections. At least it could be apathy — disenchantment might be more apropos.

My first guess is that young and hopeful voters are turned off by the negativity in politics (usually more prevalent during the midterms), which inherently targets an older and more cynical crowd. It may be too late to say this, but you can’t let the negative ads dissuade you from practicing your most basic right as a citizen. We have to cut through the negativity and focus on the substance — that’s what should be important to our electorate.

As the Pew Research Center pointed out, voter turnout has traditionally dropped off during the midterms. In fact, turnout has consistently dropped in the midterms since the 1840s. 

In 2008, 57.1 percent of the voting-age population cast ballots, but in 2010 that number dropped to 36.9. In 2012, the turnout jumped back to 53.7. It should be noted that these numbers have been adjusted by Pew Research Center to account for “voter eligibility” rather than just “voting age.” The adjusted amounts show that turnout for 2008 was 61.6 percent, 39.9 for 2010, and 58.2 for 2012.

It’s no secret that people care more about presidential elections than they care about the Senate or House races, but why? I think it has something to do with “personality” rather than “substance.” Young and/or uneducated voters tend to latch on to candidates who display great personality and charisma, but lack specificity and substance. In presidential elections, this personality factor is more exposed on the national level, and media outlets tend to create a narrative based off of it.

Take me as a perfect example. In 2008, I supported Barack Obama merely because he was charismatic and that he had the potential to be the first African American president in U.S. history. That was the youth voter in me – I wasn’t quite versed enough in policy matters to make what I would now consider an “informed” decision. I was suckered into the narrative of “hope and change.” That sort of marketing is what gets people to the polls, and it worked wonders. 

During the elections of 2012, the reelection of President Barack Obama, my voting behavior was fundamentally different. That time around, I voted based on policy, and I largely ignored the attack ads and jaded souls of the non-voters dissuading me from casting my ballot. I understood what was at stake and I voted on substance rather than personality.

But this strategy of marketing a candidate’s personality works well in the midterms, too (most notably Joni Ernst’s “Iowa Values” narrative). But young people simply didn’t show up to vote. The best explanation I can come up with is that young people around my age tend to think that midterms don’t matter.

Here’s the thing, my fellow students: they do matter.

Midterm elections matter just as much as the presidential election. In the midterms, as well as in presidential elections, we decide who will represent us in Congress. Congress has a lot of power, and from what I’ve heard from some less educated voters (I won’t name names) is that they think the executive branch has the “most” power – hence the emphasis on voting in presidential years.

So the problem with low turnout in the midterm elections can be attributed to a misunderstanding of politics itself. Voters simply don’t know enough to vote in the first place and secondly don’t cast an informed vote.

The electorate doesn’t understand how to use its fundamental right to vote.

Elections shouldn’t be about the drama, the pseudo-events and the gaffes. If so, then the midterms should be hyped up just as much as the presidential elections. But even so, education is the only route we can take to get people to understand that elections aren’t about personality but substance – and that every election is crucial. That is at the core of all of this, and my peers, unfortunately, don’t quite understand.

After all, we should care about how our candidates will govern rather than the color of their skin or if they’ve served in the military. Who cares about whether the candidate is black or white? Who cares if they’ve worked for a big business and know how budgets work? The point is to elect somebody who will represent us best — to vote consistently and thoughtfully.

Isn’t that what we set out to do in the first place?