Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Baby boomers beware: Obama is the face of a new generation

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:10 PM
Original message
Baby boomers beware: Obama is the face of a new generation
A good opinion piece I ran into:

http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070513/OPINION04/105130030/1022/OPINION

-snip-

We’ve had other African-Americans run for president. What makes Obama a trailblazer is that the 45-year-old is the first member of the post-baby boom generation to seek the White House. The candidate himself set the template when, in announcing his candidacy in February, he talked about how Americans have long met the challenge of changing their country for the better. “Today,” he said, “we are called once more — and it is time for our generation to answer that call.”

-snip-

But if Obama is correct and this really is his generation’s moment, doesn’t that mean that the moment is ending for the baby boomers — you know, the generation that said it would never get old, that it would never leave the stage, that it would redefine retirement, etc.? Boomers must realize that if Obama is elected, it could make it less likely that one of them will ever again be elected president. From that point on, the question will be whether to elect a Democratic Generation X’er or a Republican Generation X’er. But either way, chances are that the candidates of the future will be of that generation.

At least that’s been the pattern. When John Kennedy became the first member of the World War II generation elected in 1960, and Bill Clinton the first baby boomer elected in 1992, the curtain effectively dropped for the preceding generation.

Don’t expect the boomers to go quietly. We’ve heard a lot from the media about how Obama doesn’t have the “experience” to be president. Every time you hear that refrain, think about what they’re really trying to say — that he’s too young, in the same way that Kennedy and Clinton were taken lightly by their elders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hey, I'm a boomer and I like Obama just fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Obama's not a Baby Boomer?
What is he? Gen X?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. He's either on the tail end of the baby boomers or the beginning of gen X.
Edited on Mon May-14-07 07:24 PM by Connie_Corleone
The start of Gen X varies. I've heard 1964 or 65 being the start. But I've heard 1961 also. I'm a gen X'er born in 1971.

Obama was born in 1961.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. The definition of BBs I generally go by is preople born 1943-1961
The "sociological" generation seems to offset from the demographic baby boom by a few years, according to what I've read the offset because we don't remember much of the first 2 or 3 years of our lives.

The definition I use for Gen-Xers is people born 1962-1981.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
28. According to Social Security
Edited on Mon May-14-07 09:54 PM by ProudDad
it's 1943 to 1954.

Actually, it's 1946 to about 1956.

They dipped lower to deprive those of us born during the war of an earlier retirement. Not many of us compared to the boomers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shireen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. according to answers.com
it's people born between (and including) 1946 and 1964.

Is there a formal definition available somewhere?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. I tell Obama supporters I work with the steer away from this goofy strategy
Obama's message and candidacy is for all people...not some ageist garbage where boomers "need to get out of the way" or whatever. I've told some younger supporters that the strategy to alienate "baby boomers" is insipid...at best.

I've had one volunteer say crap like "Obama is not neccessarily for baby boomers" ... and crap like "his web site is a lot like Facebook and MySpace with some YouTube-ish stuff"... people don't necessarily know what the hell that means...and don't need to know to be "cool".

Keep it open.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yes, please, zulchzulu nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. wow -- it's another *us versus them* piece
That's a REAL plan to *unite* people for your candidate. :sarcasm:

NOT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. The columnist could've made his point better without the us vs. them mentality.
Maybe he should just focus on the positives of a new generation leading the country in the near future without making baby boomers enemies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. Why should we beware?
Does he plan to cut off Social Security and Medicare?

:rofl:

You whippersnappers oughtta be more articulate, Sonny Boy. Or Girl.

Gotta go ride the raisin wagon now to pick up my Depends and my Metamucil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. A prescription for defeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Okay, I thought about it
This is a really dumb strategy. Let him be the new generation without alienating the older generations. I like him better as the unifier. Besides, we're talking a lot of votes here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. The Rockford paper has silly writers. What Obama is saying is
that it is time for change. he has tons of older supporters. But, the media picks at certain things and implies...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I hope that's what it is, IP
He doesn't want to get a reputation for not caring about the elderly. He needs to be clear on that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jedr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. I'm age 60
And if W is an example of a boomer....I welcome the change!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. Older people vote. That's a reality that every younger politician
has to face. The baby boomers' suspicion of Obama is not without grounds. I'm an older voter -- older than the baby boomers. I'm watching what Obama is saying about Social Security and also how he is handling other issues that are important to me, and although I like Obama as a man, I'm not sure I like some of the things he is saying.

Frankly, he is inexperienced. Has he even completed his first term as a senator? Inexperience and youth are not necessarily negatives. Obama has a lot of enthusiasm and a lot of energy, and he seems less intransigent about crossing party lines than some of those who have been soured by the horrible experiences of the years under Reagan, et al. So, whether Obama's inexperience is bad depends.

Obama needs to show baby boomers and us older people not only that he has good judgment, but that he understands our problems. In contrast with all generations since the Depression, many of us face the future without pensions in an economy that is creating fewer and fewer jobs that are appropriate for us as we age.

Obama will get our support if he reaches out to us. So far, I have not seen him do that. The Social Security eligibility age has already been raised. Obama is talking about raising it even more. That is frightening. The fact of the matter is that as you age the chance that you will have a debilitating or tiring disease or condition increases drastically. Incentives to encourage healthy older people to wait until they are 70 to take Social Security are already in place. But jobs that older people can do have to be available. And that is a tough order. Jobs that require long hours of standing on your feet behind a cash register, emptying bedpans or slinging hamburgers at McDonalds probably aren't going to work for us. Yet we aren't likely to be hired to handle the latest technology either. Employers have to understand that they may not discriminate against older workers by preferring younger workers in hiring, promoting and training. Obama is going to have to tune in to the problems of senior citizens and baby boomers if he wants to overcome the age gap. He needs our votes more than we need him, so it's up to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
14. Why do I get the impression that you are pleased about this? nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
15. Lots of presumptions in that article about baby boomers.
I don't recall saying I'll never get old. Nor did I ever say I'd never leave the stage or that I would redefine retirement.

What nonsense. The attitudes and mores of generations have been blending for quite some time now. The fact that Obama, the 45-year-old "trailblazer," is the first post baby-boomer to seek the White House is simply due to circumstance of when he was born.

It's fresh, it's new, it's brand Obama! :boring:

Substance, not style, is all that matters. And I frankly think it's insulting to appeal to younger people on the basis of who is in what generation. Almost as bad as pushing Mittens Romney because he's the Ken doll of politicians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
16. that is my paper. My town's newspaper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
17. As a boomer, I am totally behind Obama. The boomer candidate s**ks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
20. That article is divisive and wrong in a lot of ways
Not first of which is that it drags out the tired old lies about Boomers. I am in that netherworld between the boomers and the GenXers, too, but isn't the point to find someone to bridge the gap, not drive everyone apart?

Worse, if it's true that Clinton was the first boomer president (and, if you count Bush, which I don't, Bush is the last) then I would say that they are a generation that has been extremely under represented compared to others - it's a large population sector that had to suffer under Reagan and Bush1 policy for the best part of their adult lives.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. Obama IS a boomer
the postwar birth rate didn't start to decline until 1964 (46-64 is the boomer period). You could call him part of the fin de boomer era, but calling hima member of the post-babyboom generation is a mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I am a tailender. My sisters were born 62 and 64. Cusp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
23. Don't look now
but Obama IS a baby boomer. By definition: those born between 1946 and 1964.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
24. Obama is the face of a new generation in American politics
A generation composed of Americans of all ages and walks of life.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
25. Obama is a Boomer ..... born between 1946 and 1964
That's the most commonly accepted span. It is otherwise described as being between WWII and the Viet Nam War.

"There is some disagreement as to the exact beginning and end dates of the baby boom, but the range most commonly accepted is as starting in 1946 and ending in 1964.<2><3><4> The problem with this definition is that this period may be too long for a cultural generation, even though it covers a time of increased births. If the gross number of births were the indicator, births began to decline from the peak in 1957 (4,300,000) but fluctuated or did not decline by much more than 40,000 (1959-1960) to 60,000 (1962-1963) until a sharp decline from 1964 (4,027,490) to 1965 (3,760,358). This makes 1964 a good year to mark the end of the baby boom in the U.S.<5>

In his book Boomer Nation, Steve Gillon states that the baby boom began in 1946 and ends in 1964, but he breaks Baby Boomers into two groups: Boomers, born between 1945 and 1957; and Shadow Boomers born between 1958 and 1964.<6> Further, in Marketing to Leading-Edge Baby Boomers, author Brent Green defines Leading-Edge Boomers as those born between 1946 and 1955. This group is a self-defining generational cohort or unit because its members all reached their late teen years during the height of the Vietnam War era, the defining historical event of this coming-of-age period. Green describes the second half of the demographic baby boom, born from the mid-1950s through the mid-1960s as either Trailing-Edge Boomers or Generation Jones. <7> In some cases the term Shadow Boomer is incorrectly applied to the children of the Baby Boomers; this group is more accurately referred to as Echo Boomers.
"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer

And another citation of this same span .....

"In 2006, the oldest of the baby boomers, the generation born between 1946 and 1964, will turn 60 years old. Among the Americans celebrating their 60th will be our two most recent presidents, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Other well-known celebrities reaching this milestone include Cher, Donald Trump, Sylvester Stallone and Dolly Parton. To commemorate this occasion, the Census Bureau has compiled a collection of facts relating to, perhaps, our most celebrated generation."

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/006105.html

And for what its worth, I'd guess we have at least two more Boomer presidents to go. If Obama wins this go-round, he'd be the first of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. So he's a "shadow Boomer." That's a pretty cool term. Shadow Boomer. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
27. My mom's a Depression era republican
and she likes Obama.

She doesn't know what he stands for (neither do I) but she likes him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrat2thecore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
30. Obama is no Kennedy - and he's no Clinton
Edited on Mon May-14-07 11:33 PM by democrat2thecore
We’ve heard a lot from the media about how Obama doesn’t have the “experience” to be president. Every time you hear that refrain, think about what they’re really trying to say — that he’s too young, in the same way that Kennedy and Clinton were taken lightly by their elders.

Obama is no JFK or Bill Clinton. I fail to see how people can't see that. His fluffy answers and uncertainty when questioned is something you NEVER saw with Kennedy or Clinton. Clinton had been Governor for seemingly 25 terms, he knew his stuff. Kennedy was well, Kennedy was Kennedy. And Obama's no Kennedy. Biggest hype job since, since.....well....Howard Dean.

I'm about ready to jump on with Biden. Saw him on TV again today and he's just REALLY good.

edit to include relevant quote from post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC