You might think it's time for the baby boomers to shuffle off stage and let the next generations take charge, but Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are from an even earlier generation, an they're acting like it's not the baby boomers turn yet.
President Trump was 70 when he was inaugurated, the oldest man to take on the job of president in U.S. history. (Ronald Reagan was 69.)Who's the other white man??
And now we’re fixing to talk about Sen. Bernie Sanders at 77 and Biden at 76 in the driver’s seat of a divided and complicated nation? They are even older than the baby boomer generation, which started in 1946.
All three white men leading the polls are too old to even renew their driver’s licenses in California without retaking the test.
Anyway, it's so Gen X to think that competition must back down and let you have what you want. Sorry, but even if there's some ethic of generational equity worth invoking, the Boomers haven't had our full share of Presidents yet, and we're still blocked by the older generation. As long as they're still participating, you can't disqualify us yet.
And as for your driver’s license analogy: Presidential candidates do take a test. They have to work like mad and travel and speak and submit to tough interviews and debates for over a year right in front of our eyes. And there's only one license to hand out. We'll see who gets it.
पोस्ट्स
६८ टिप्पण्या:
I assume time is up for Justice RBG as well, right?
Why do you show so much interest in the Democratic primary? It seems your goal is to do anything that will keep Trump in office.
Anyway, I meant to comment on one of your Biden posts earlier, but this one gets closer to addressing the core issue: Biden is another establishment crypto-Republican who talks the game about core Democratic issues, but will give the ball away just like all the others. He's from Delaware, and a shill to the credit industry. This would be his third run, and every time he does it he sticks his foot in his mouth with some stupid gaffe that forces him out quite early in the game.
This is not about age. Voters who care about policy and substance over image are good with Bernie. Bernie fights for their needs, not just their pride. And the only reason Biden is running anyway is because he had the VP crews afforded him by being the most working-class old white guy to make the black front-runner heading his ticket in 2008 seem less "scary" to voters.
But if this comes down to nothing more than some stupid kulturkampf contest of the crazy shyster old white nationalist Trumpf against the solid, decent old white compadre you can count on Biden, then Biden is the right ammo for that.
It doesn't bring us forward one iota to addressing the actual challenges messing up this nation, but that's image and our politics for you.
submit to tough interviews
Ha ha ha! You mean like Matt Laur asking Hillary a hard question and getting blamed, partially, for her loss! Ha ha ha ha ha!
“It seems your goal is to do anything that will keep Trump in office.”
Hey Althouse, the political officer is at the door, and he wants you to get your mind right!
“Petulia” must be the Latin root of “petulant”. Fits in this situation at least.
So we're going to have to go through our own Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko?
the Boomers haven't had our full share of Presidents yet, and we're still blocked by the older generation
Thank you for pointing that out if for no other reason than to educate all the "Gens" that have come after us that we are sick and tired of "Boomer" having become a synonym for everything old.
It's just not fair!
[finally I can play victim]
Please, they’re only 50.
That was the “New 30” wasn’t it?
Who's the other white man??
I assume Trump, but it could be Hillary.
You know that anybody who wants to undermine Trump with Althouse’s readers could easily do so by getting specific. in the comments with actual cases of Trump “corruption” and then defending them against objections. But when the anti Trump comments all and I mean ALL amount to either trivialities, or hyperbolic denunciations reeking of kerosene breath, or vague smears that the commenter refuses to back up with facts, then it seems like the trolls here are doing more to support Trump than Althouse is. She is giving you the forum, all of you, and yet you don’t take it on. How can we not draw the conclusion that you guys have nothing?
Going on pearl clutching about pee pee tapes for two years, and then showing zero humility when it all turned out to be bullshit is just one thing.
“It seems your goal is to do anything that will keep Trump in office.”
Hey Althouse, the political officer is at the door, and he wants you to get your mind right!
It's always good to see the crazies admit that it's just their own crazy that impels them to vote for a fellow lunatic like the psychopath Trump.
"It seems your goal is to do anything that will keep Trump in office."
What in this post seems to be in service to that goal? Do I seem to be helping Biden and you think Biden is a weak opponent for Trump? If that's your idea, click on the "biden" tag and read the last 10 posts I wrote about Biden and make sense of your theory.
Or does "seems" just mean you looked at one thing and a whole flood of imaginative ideas came into your head?
A whole flood of idea cross currents come into my mind when I read a Post by LaAlthouse. It's better than doing a NYT Crossword puzzle, one of the really hard ones. That's why I love her.
It's always good to see the crazies admit that it's just their own crazy that impels them to vote for a fellow lunatic ...
Ritmo - of all people - just wrote that.
RBG may have mummified by now. Have there been first hand reports of life from the living eight?
"They have to work like mad"
O worked?
"and travel"
Like Hill on her chardonnay days?
"and speak"
Like Slow Joe in PA?
"and submit to tough interviews"
Wait, what? When did a Dem ever submit to a tough interview? I mean, after Ted K couldn't explain why he was running.
It's one of those things: we are lulled into thinking Althouse might begin to see the world as it is, and then this--a small gobsmacking detail no deplorable could have uttered.
Anyway, I meant to comment on one of your Biden posts earlier, but this one gets closer to addressing the core issue: Biden is another establishment crypto-Republican
Ritmo, I agree with you that Bernie Sanders is the only choice. I think Kamala Harris will be the best VP candidate for him to balance the ticket, don't you?
What in this post seems to be in service to that goal?
Not this one. The preponderance of all the others. They seem to convey an appreciative sort of invincibility about him.
Do I seem to be helping Biden and you think Biden is a weak opponent for Trump?
I don't know. I think here you're reporting the fact... of someone's reaction to his age. I don't see how these posts "help or hurt" his candidacy one way or another. As far as how well he'd do against Trump, that's all speculative at this point - which is fun. But in this election I feel more and more impelled to keep any analysis confined to as many of the facts that can be known.
What in this post seems to be in service to that goal? Do I seem to be helping Biden and you think Biden is a weak opponent for Trump? If that's your idea, click on the "biden" tag and read the last 10 posts I wrote about Biden and make sense of your theory.
If you want Biden to run against Trump, then it's ok to say so. As for whether it would work or not (assuming you'd rather see Trump defeated), we'd all find out in Nov. 2020. So the point at that point would be moot, other than if you were interested in making political predictions over the last 15 years and how well they would have held up.
Or does "seems" just mean you looked at one thing and a whole flood of imaginative ideas came into your head?
That sentence in my post was more about what I observe you writing about Trump. Do you feel a need to be especially uncritical of him? Does Scott Adams, and all the times you've uploaded his videos on this?
It just conveys a sense of Trump's alleged political invincibility. If that's the case, it can't be all that objective and deserves or at least invites skepticism and counter-argument. There are a great many that can be made.
But if this comes down to nothing more
However, I see you are hedging. Better Hitler than Trump, right? You'll suck whatever cock the Democrats stick in your face.
With the first boomer bill Clinton, there were huzzah with Obama the same with w raspberries. This is how it goes.
Yes Biden was the handmaiden of all ths subprime banks, Obama Helped start the trend with his suit against Citigroup tansfl
Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are not baby boomers... They are even older than the baby boomer generation, which started in 1946... [and] acting like it's not the baby boomers turn yet.
Buddy Holly, Born: September 7, 1936, Lubbock, TX
Not Fade Away
I'm gonna tell you how it's gonna be
(Bop-bop-bop-bop)
You're gonna give your love to me
(Bop-bop-bop-bop)
Love to last more than one day
(Bop-bop-bop-bop)
Love is loving and not fade away
(Bop-bop-bop-bop)
Love is loving and not fade away
Biden and Bernie's status in polls show how weak the rest of the D field is.
I thought Kamala Harris would have the big money behind her, California, POC and vagina and all.
She seems to be flaming out. She should keep her mouth shut in committee hearings but it may be too late.
readering said: "So we're going to have to go through our own Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko?"
That's precisely what this reminded me of too. Our political candidates are starting to resemble a bunch of aging Soviet apparatchiks.
At least Gorbachev was significantly younger when he took over.
We seem to be missing someone like that: Someone who isn't as young and untested as a Beto or a Mayor Pete, but younger than superannuated Biden and Sanders. IOW, someone in his late fifties or maybe early sixties.
Petulia Dvorak is a little sloppy in comparing Trump's age at his inauguration to Biden's and Sanders's ages now. If Biden is elected, he'll be 78 at his inauguration. Sanders would be 79.
In fairness to Ms. Dvorak, it probably wasn't sloppiness to compare apples to oranges. Most likely it was intentional.
I've read here and elsewhere that Obama essentially destroyed a generation of Democrat candidates at the state level. If true, that may be coming home to roost now.
If that's the case, it can't be all that objective and deserves or at least invites skepticism and counter-argument. There are a great many that can be made.
“Clearly!"
pee pee tapes (how did that work out?) won’t be making them though!
There is an incredible shortage of anti-Trump material on the web, well anti-Trump material based on verifiable evidence anyway.
Legalization vs normalization.
Women do have a choice. In fact, women have two choices, the first is reconciliation, the second is avoidance. Pro-Choice is two choices too late.
Am I the only one here who thinks TICS's obsession with our proprietress' influence, as opposed to her opinions per se, is weird?
Reminds me of a good friend, who has insisted since the election that FOX NEWS! stole it from Hillary . . . because they attacked her so relentlessly and so unfairly! Which is to say, some substantial number of voters who might have voted for her were kept away by a source that very few Hillary-leaners would listen to anyway, and FOX's total primetime viewership is what 2 million, and 63 MILLION people voted for her . . .
This is like that, only orders of magnitude smaller. I suppose at some level Prof. Althouse might feel flattered.
Narr
Haven't Trumper
Make way for the Psychedelic Warlords & Silver-Spoon Socialists!
Soviet-era joke. An Intourist Guide is showing a group of foreigners around Red Square, and the go into Lenin's mausoleum. They gaze for a few moments, and then a Spaniard speaks up, "This is all very fine, but we have one in Madrid that sits up and talks!"
***
Brezhnev is giving a welcoming speech to Margaret Thatcher. Looks at his index card:
B: Mrs. Ghandi, we welcome you!
Aides behind him whisper, "Comrade General Secretary, that is Mrs. Thatcher!"
B: I know it is Mrs. Thatcher, but the card says, "Welcome, Mrs. Ghandi!"
Narr
Never trust anyone younger than 66
I’m also a pre-boomer, and I think we’re too old for such a tough job. To prove me wrong, Biden and Bernie can go through the debates and primaries while tweeting all night. If Trump can do it, they should be able to.
Speaking of Thatcher, Biden just said he's consulted with her about Trump.
I'm confused why you think the boomers have not had their fair share of presidents. By the end of Trump's first term, we will have had 28 straight years of boomer presidents (Clinton, W Bush, and Trump were all born in mid 1946 as the part of the first batch of baby boomers. Obama was born in 1961) The baby boom is generally considered to have lasted from 1946-1964, or 18 years. The boomers have had more presidents than expected based on age. There have been no presidents from the preceding silent generation. Biden and Sanders are their last shot.
Never trust anyone UNDER 30.
"Anyway, it's so Gen X to think that competition must back down and let you have what you want."
Is it?
The prevailing stereotype for Gen X is they just don't give af. Slackers.
@Craig...it's interesting that the 30's and/or pre-war 40's didn't produced a president. We think of a youthful Kennedy as being of the 60's but he was born in 1917 and Johnson was the first born in the 20th century.
"Not this one. The preponderance of all the others. They seem to convey an appreciative sort of invincibility about him."
Do you have any sense of how ludicrous that is?
LOL! They're all Boomers. Trump, Biden, Bernie, Hillary the whole lot of them. The younger gens have taken over advertising, movies, music, games, entertainment, the majority of those who purchase those items. Cultural producers no longer appeal to appeal to the Boomers, and cater to the younger generations.
No, it's not the younger gens turn yet in politics. But nothing is more inevitable then generational change.
Time's up, Baby Boomers! Let the Dumbest Generation take over! We don't need no stinkin' education . . . .
"Do you have any sense of how ludicrous that is?"
That's just his standard: projection, falsehood, invective.
Dvorak displays a millennial attitude, not a Gen-Xer one.
China is not having babies and that is a problem, says China's old governing crowd. Now, let's turn to America. See what Althouse did there?
Do you have any sense of how ludicrous that is?
I have a sense of how ludicrous it is for someone who invents a "derangement syndrome" tag about a deranged president, who never finds a Scott Adams video she doesn't like or a post about how politically powerful Trump is to link to, to present herself as having an attitude about Trump that's anywhere near as critical as the average voter's.
You crack me up. ;-)
Your colors are showing. If you don't want to be put on the defensive about how whitewashed and artificially neutralized the tone of your Trump coverage is, then here's a hint: Don't write so many posts like that.
Just about the only people you've criticized the last two years are those who criticize Trump. You know, the majority of Americans. That's not anyone's fault except the fault of the person writing about Trump every day - and how much you feel that everyone is "over-reacting" to him.
Here's a tiny violin for your reaction to my characterization of your light-touch Trump criticism. ;-)
And here's my armchair diagnosis of your condition: You have an acute case of Trump International Crime Syndicate Derangement Syndrome!
See how easy this game is? Sooner or later you'll want to reassess the tone of your Trump posts. Although I suspect you'll only do that once a challenger trounces his ass in an election. (Surely you'll stay out of any attempt - no matter how successful - to prosecute him or expose his shady finances). But that's how you are - a political bandwagon jumper of the most enthusiastic variety!
That's just his standard: projection, falsehood, invective.
Awwww. If you want some KY jelly for your butthurt, I'm sure they sell it at your local drugstore, Executive Snowflake.
3.6% unemployment, 3.4% wage growth, 1.6% inflation and greater than 3% economic growth.
Is GHW Bush not considered Silent Generation?
The weakness of the Democratic field is a reflection of how cah-raaaazy the looselugnut libs have become as evidenced by AOC and Omar and Bernie. That some old fart like Biden is currently swamping the field can only be explained by the fact that he is, by comparison, relatively sane.
The lefites are nasty, hateful little shits, and everyone knows it except for those who put it all on the line for the pee pee tapes. You can't blame our hostess if she is clear-eyed enough to have a tag or two for that. Ritmo is just pissed because she isn't following instructions from the leftie media politruk.....but I repeat myself.
- Krumhorn
Krumhorn said...
.....but I repeat myself.
With every word.
But your corporate DINO-establishment cheerleading for the loser DNC is so charming. If only Americans thought the decent policies were the ones championed by the Republicans. But they don't. And they know that your party is a cowardly bunch of ho's being led and kept on artificial life-support by a gameshow host president a hell of a lot more "nasty, hateful and little a shit" than anyone who ever ran for national office on the left.
Suck on that.
Biden was born in 1942. If he were to win the 2020 elections, he would be 79 in his first year as president (term of office beginning 2021).
Yes, that IS too old. It is. Trump was born in 1946. IMO, he is too old for another term, but as I stare at the Dem slate, I suspect I will be voting for Trump. Trump will be 75 in the first year of his second term.
Does the four years make a difference? Yes, because at the end of life as in the beginning of life, five years is very significant. But I assume Trump will stay with Pence as VP, and if something happens, that will be what we will get.
I'm perturbed by geriatric politics.
On a more serious note, Omarosa and Tom Arnold due to release tapes that will for sude, definitely prove Trump is a Nazi racist and that crazy commenters have been right all along.
Soon, very soon......
Mean while, KEEP HOPE ALIVE
“I have a sense of how ludicrous it is for someone who invents a "derangement syndrome" tag about a deranged president, who never finds a Scott Adams video she doesn't like or a post about how politically powerful Trump is to link to, to present herself as having an attitude about Trump that's anywhere near as critical as the average voter's.“
Whoa, ain’t that the truth? What is ludicrous is someone who should know better, who doesn’t.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
.....
Whoa, ain’t that the truth? What is ludicrous is someone who should know better, who doesn’t.
5/5/19, 6:28 PM
HaHa, Once again (Anonymous) Inga shows up again hoping to rekindle the romance with her goofy pal Ritmo by agreeing with his eloquently stupid comments.
Come out of the closet Allie and, KEEP HOPE ALIVE
If only Americans thought the decent policies were the ones championed by the Republicans. But they don't.
Decent? Everyone thinks they are decent. Hitler probably thought he was decent. When he looked into a mirror, he didn't deviously laugh out loud at the pig turd looking back at him.
The problem with the lefties is that they are certain that they have a monopoly on decency, and when you disagree with them, they call you out as a racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, or all around hater. That's all they got. Americans don't feel warmly toward those who operate from such a lofty perch of unchallenged virtue and presumed decency. Generally, that means that the rest of us are about to be shit upon.
- Krumhorn
@O_O - GHW Bush was born in 1924, generally considered part of the Greatest Generation.
The Silent Generation was 1925-1945. Their childhood included the depression, WWII, then the cold war and Korean War. Tough times made them (generally) traditionalist, hard working, thrifty, and focused on simple things in life like work and family instead of activism and protest.
Sanders and Biden are at the end of the Silent Generation.
We can only wish...
Anyone with a brain who is put off by all these oldsters would ask what is wrong with the next generation that it has not produced candidates that can compete.
Of course, in the case of the Democrats, the Clintons very methodically cleaned out anybody they thought could challenge Hillary when she was ready--they missed Obama who was a kind of "Black Swan" event, in Nassim Taleb's term. And, having lost in 2008, they extended that effort all the way to 2016, wiping out a whole generation of potential Democratic Presidents (except Obama, who snuck under the Clinton radar until it was too late). Then, after the whole Dem Party leadership rigged it for her, Hillary lost, again. Not just Sanders, but O'Malley (remember him?)
But who let them do all that? Not Baby Boomers in general, and not Republicans.
Clean out your own stable first.
https://joebiden.info
Check it out!
Everyone thinks they are decent.
I'm talking about polling policy approval, not self-esteem. READING IS FUNDAMENTAL.
I like that website!
So, 2.5 years for denial to turn to anger?
I think Democratics have to run as the party of morals, depending what the definition of is is.
What could go wrong?
The United States has not had a nation for quite some time, codified with federal laws in around 1965.
Petula Dvorak (an anagram for valuated pork---there are better ones available at wordsmith.org), voice of reason. Yeah...no. Occasionally, she's an interesting read, but, most times, just MOTS.
Wilbur said...
I've read here and elsewhere that Obama essentially destroyed a generation of Democrat candidates at the state level. If true, that may be coming home to roost now.
That's a good point, but it should be extended. Clinton was hard on the Democrats at the Federal level. But because he wasn't a left-wing nut (see "Triangulation), long term former Democrat voters will still willing to vote Democrat at the State level.
Obama is a left-wing nut, AND Democrats had the misfortune that the voter backlash to Obama happened on a redistricting election rather than an ordinary midterm.
So a lot of Democrat Governors in competitive States lost, even more Democrats in State legislatures lost, the GOP got to replace Democrat gerrymanders with Republican ones, and a whole lot of Democrat politicians had to get the kind of jobs that make it pretty much impossible to run for President..
There's currently 22 members of the 2020 Democrat Presidential Primary clown car. How many were executives in charge of anything larger than a small city? Trump was new to politics, but at least he ran something large.
As former VP, bidder's the closest the Democrat have to a traditional winning candidate. And he's not very close.
Then there's ideological capture. One reason why there's so few black Democrats holding Statewide elective office is because of the existence of "majority minority districts." Those districts are all so hard-core left that the only competition is in the primary (see AOC). And the positions you have to take to win there are not conducive to winning statewide in pretty much any place other than NY, IL, or CA.
Other than Biden, which candidates in the Democrat clown car will be able to take positions that can win WI, OH, PA, MI? Which candidates can win the election without winning any of those States?
I'm talking about polling policy approval, not self-esteem. READING IS FUNDAMENTAL.
That's not what you said. Writing what you actually mean is fundamental, not crab-walking yourself away from a stupid post.
The problem is that you actually meant what you wrote since all lefties instinctively conflate their policy preferences with decency and their superior virtue rather than what is really at work: a consistent drive toward exercising power over the rest of us and enforcing your will that we do and say as you direct.
Scratch a leftie and there is a tyrant screaming to get out.
- Krumhorn
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा