Comments on: Is Obama a Baby Boomer?

By: bill

bill — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 06:03:41 +0000

Strauss and Howe in their 1991 book Generations broke the country’s history into 20 year-span generations, with Generation X running from 1961-1981 — so Obama would be part of Gen X.

http://www.lifecourse.com/

But many define Generation X as something like 1965-1974, or even 1965-70, so that it’s not really a full generation, but more like a few random years between “Baby Boomers” and their kids (Gen Y).

By: A.J. Sutter

A.J. Sutter — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 05:46:15 +0000

Thanks for the ammo, Trends. I had no idea I was part of Generation Jones before; but it’s more evidence to refute Nate’s idea that polarization caused by W., at least, is a Boomer-1960’s thang.

By: TrendsWatcher

TrendsWatcher — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:17:47 +0000

Well-written piece. Obama is part of the boom in babies after WWII, but he is certainly not part of the Baby Boom Generation. Many nationally prominent commentators have said that Obama is specifically part of Generation Jones, born 1954-1965, between the Baby Boomers and Generation X. Google this and you’ll see it’s a pretty long list of commentators who have already stated this position. Among those who have publicly referred to Obama as part of Generation Jones are: David Brooks (New York Times), Karen Tumulty (Time Magazine), Roland Martin (CNN), Michael Steele (Chairman, GOPAC), Chris Van Hollen (Chairman, DCCC), Stuart Rothenberg (Roll Call), Clarence Page (Chicago Tribune), Juan Williams (Fox News Channel), Howard Wolfson (Political Advisor), Mel Martinez (U.S. Senator [R-Florida]), Carl Leubsdorf (Dallas Morning News), Jonathan Alter (Newsweek), and Peter Fenn (MSNBC).

You can see some of them discussing this topic in this 5 minute video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ta_Du5K0jk

And lots more here about this specific topic: http://www.generationjones.com/2008election.html

As as a member of Generation Jones myself, I’m quite happy to see our long-ignored generation finally being recognized.

By: Carol Stanley

Carol Stanley — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:59:57 +0000

I think of boomers who are in fifties and sixties..Others are young and have totally different agendas and ideas.

By: A.J. Sutter

A.J. Sutter — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:21 +0000

Call me a boomer, but I think your theory is flawed. An alternative theory is that W. evoked ire because of things like lying in order to get us into a war, not planning properly for that war, the torture memo, the trashing of America’s image overseas, etc. This is not a stand-in for any debate about the 1960s. I confess that W. has replaced Nixon in the lowest circle of my Presidential anti-Pantheon, but this is not because, say, Nixon now seems to me in retrospect to be more liberal than I thought back then; it’s based on a more absolute standard.