biwah: We agree more than we disagree. It’s just a question of whether the youth vote shows up in big enough numbers to offset the Boomers. Call me a huge skeptic on that.

I am agnostic as to whether the younger voters will turn out for him in the primaries, and indeed this question is critical – but there are many circumstances that say we are in a new era, electorally. The technophilic younger generation has not swung the outcome in a national election yet, but it could very well do it in ‘08. I am not sure where Kevin gets such an assured sense of pessimism. It is not justified by the moderate margin in the polls IMO.

Generally, the Boomers do not want the party to be over in America, and are clinging to irrelevant political beliefs that have deeply damaged the Dem party’s coherence on most issues. HRC will utilize most of the same old rehtoric. Obama has cast his lot on the rejction of various outmoded notions that still plague the Dems (though it’s largely something one just senses – it’s more in attittude than in any obvious substantive way, so far). The younger generation, including most of Gen Jones (my first time hearing this term too), has fewer illusions and is less invested in the right vs. left paradigm (i.e. social programs vs. tax cuts, workers vs. trade, thoroughly in the box thinking), which has changed a lot during the time many of us came of age, and will be looking more for coherence and less for push-button dogmatic satisfaction. If nothing else, Obama is willing to go further in building the script from scratch in a way that makes sense to younger voters but will feel uncomfortable to Boomers.

Finally, I think SS/Medicare are enormous generational issues which will create a significant divide when it fully surfaces, and that this is a big reason for my own support for Obama. But it is unlikely that any of the major candidates will bring this to the fore on their own, so it’s likely to be a mainstream issue only post-’08.

Yet, the myth persists that there are there easily identifiable groups called generations that have noticeable impacts upon our social/political world.

They probably don’t.

Oh, I admit there is a shared vocabulary common within age cohorts, especially among folks of a certain class and level of education, and these are exactly the people who are writing the books, teaching in the colleges and universities, serving as television talking heads, etc., but making the jump from that shared vocabulary of an elite to devining the political thoughts of the “generation” as a whole is certainly mistaken.

So I think what Kevin idetifies is real, but I think it is confined largely to the chattering classes. So if Obama (or any other candidate) wants to appeal to the greater mass of voters he or she needs to not identify the chattering classes with the whole country.

Now, you and I want this change, but my central thesis is twofold: 1. The Boomers are not yet ready for this change. They’re still fighting over, from my viewpoint, ancient history and are not ready to give it up. 2. Yes, if the other demographics show up come Winter ‘08 (and Nov. ‘08), this could change. Very recent history tells me that my generation (sadly) will not. Maybe we’ve become jaded by our Boomer parents (I haven’t, but I’m guessing others have). Even if the other generations do show up, the chances of a semi-united front are slim. Thus, advantage Boomers.

Yes, I am a real supporter, and I hope I’m wrong. But look at the national (and state) Dem. polls; check out the Hillary supporters vs. the Obama supporters. Hillary has the now traditional base, Obama has a very new base.

I had not heard the “Generation Jones” term used, so I thank you for the info. Still, if you were born before 1960, you experienced quite a lot. True, they probably couldn’t vote, but they experienced the end of Vietnam, Watergate, Roe v. Wade, and other turmoil. Note that Obama was born after 1960, so he likely sees this as historical in nature

Many commentators still miss an important part of the equation with Obama–he clearly doesn’t think of himself as a Boomer (he made his post-Boomer status a centerpiece of the speech in which he announced his candidacy for the Presidency)…and his public statements clearly indicate he doesn’t consider himslef part of Generation X. His bio and political temperment and policies point unambigulously to his real generation: Generation Jones–the heretofore lost generation between the Boomers and Xers. Jonesers, born 1954-1965 (Obama was born in ‘61) have emerged in recent elections as a key voting segment–if you google the term, you’ll see tons of major media attention that this term/concept has received. Obama really does personify Generation Jones, and Jonesers–who were 28% of the 2006 midterm election electorate–relate to Obama in a way which could be hugely helpful to him in this election.

Also, when you speak about liberal Boomers vs. conservative Boomers, it’s worth noting that the real Boomers (born from approximately 1942 to 1953) are the most liberal (ie. Dem-voting) US generation, while Jonesers are the most conservative (ie. GOP-voting) US generation–a fact which underlines the absurdity of the traditional lumping together of these two very different generations into one (ie. the ridiculously inaccurate Baby Boom “Generation” of 1946-1964). Fortunately, a concensus has been emerging among generations experts that Boomers and Jonesers are, in fact, two seperate generations, and numerous political experts have commented that whichever party is able to swing Jonesers their way in ‘08 will win the Presidency.

Boomers account for 29% of the total U.S. population. Given the fact that few under 30 bother to vote, this generation can dominate the political class.

Obama’s non-Boomer appeal easily extends to voters in their mid and late 30’s. Also, your argument requires that you dismiss the under-30 group. The circumstances that have kept them at home on election days past have drastically changed. We have the internet, a war, and a candidate who is a spiritual peer of this group. I am not counting on them, but the ease with which you, an Obama “supporter”, write them off, is highly suspicious.

I can’t wrap my mind around the idea that many people will openly admit that they like Obama more than Hillary, but are resigned to her getting the nomination anyway. Well that’s just dandy, isn’t it? Why fight at all, why have nominations? Just let whoever “everybody knows” will get it run. Ugh, makes me sick. Hillary is the Republican’s best hope, if she gets the nomination and they played their cards just right, they could win in ‘08. An Obama nomination (and let alone a Gore one should he choose to run) would be much harder to beat. Obama gets quite a few positives amongst Republicans a huge ones amongst Independents. Democratic voters know this, but seemingly refuse to risk changing the “usual path”, even for the better.