Both Barack Obama and Sarah Palin are in their 40s — which is way on the young side of the curve for the White House run (I think you have to go back to Dan Quayle and JFK … and that’s about all that comes to mind). Granted that Palin might be an intentional reaction/counter to Obama, is this some sort of a trend? Is the “youth vote” (on the premise that “young” people are more likely to vote for folks their parents’ age than their grandparents’) driving a change in candidate demographics?
I suspect the answer will be found based on who wins this time around, and who votes for them. Unless it’s just that my own advancing decrepitude is leading to this prelude to my 2012 rant, “Hey, you kids, get the hell off my ballot!”
34 view(s)
Maybe your just blotting out the past, but BIll Clinton was just 46 when he became President making younger than Obama. And Gore was only 48 as VP.
You think they’re young because they are actually younger than you are. A first in your life (mine two if you count Palin).
Speaking of which I think Michael Palin would have made a better choice for VP – at least we know he’s traveled to the countries he’d have to deal with during diplomacy.
What, so you are asking about the two utes? =P
You are, of course, correct about Clinton/Gore. I just think of Bill as older, perhaps because he’s remained active (if older) since then.
And, yes, they are younger than me, the whippersnappers …
But perhaps that just extends my hypothesis. A reaction to Reagan, perhaps? A cult of youth, fostered by the secret dreams of the aging Boomers? Is McCain an outlier?
I had a point here, but I think I need to lie down for a nap.
———–
I do think Michael Palin would be an interesting VP choice …