The Oval Office’s Lost Generation

Generations, as we all know, matter. We’ve had three Presidents born in 1946, officially the first great year of the baby boom — Bill Clinton, the second George Bush and Donald Trump.  We’ve also had one late boomer, Barack Obama, the president born in the 1960s.

Before them, we had a couple men born in 1924, and four Presidents born the decade before that, members of the so-called Greatest Generation, all but one of whom fought in World War II.  But we never had a President born in the 1930s, the so-called Silent Generation, and now it seems certain that we never will. That may be understandable.

There weren’t that many babies born in the 30s, thanks in large part to the Great Depression. But it’s also beginning to look like we may never have a president born in my decade, the 1950s, a decade in which more than 40 million American babies came into the world.

There’s never even been a nominee from our decade.  The youngest of us 50s kids turn 60 this year.  One of those is Vice-President Mike Pence, and he could wind up in the Oval Office … one way or another.  There’s also Washington Governor Jay Inslee, a 1951 baby, a dark horse candidate for the Democratic nomination. 

But most of the many other candidates for President are younger. And ironically, the two frontrunners, according to most polls, are older – way older. Bernie Sanders was born in 1941; Joe Biden, in 1942.  Both are expected to be among a horde of presidential wannabees taking part in the official Democratic pre-primary debate that will be held in Detroit July 20 and 21, a debate that will spread out over two nights because there are so many candidates. The current media darling, South Bend Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, also will be there.

Bernie was already past 40 when Buttigieg was born.  I don’t think we’ve ever had such an enormous age range among candidates. If Sanders were to win, he would become the oldest man ever to serve as President the moment he took the oath of office.

If Buttigieg ends up being the one giving the inaugural address, which would be the day after his 39^th birthday, he would not only be the youngest President ever elected, he will remain the youngestin that job for all but a few weeks of his entire first term.

Tulsi Gabbard, the Hawaii congresswoman who is also running, is also an 80s baby, being only nine months older than Mayor Pete. There are also a bunch of would-be presidents born in the 1960s, like Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, or the 1970s, like Julian Castro.

The only rule, of course, is that you have to be 35, which is probably the only reason why nobody is pushing for Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez.

What voters have to decide, among other things, is how old is too old, and how young is too young. We do know that different generations often see things differently; if you knew people who grew up during the Great Depression, you know they likely had an entirely different attitude toward spending money than most baby boomers do. 

That’s not to say every member of every generation is the same, or that you should necessarily want a member of your own cohort to be President. Maybe most of us 50s kids were too busy with our garage bands. I am old enough to be Buttigieg’s father, but I see plenty of signs he might be equipped to lead.

Even if he will never know what it was like to see the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show.