I believe that old people are our future.
Although the number of Americans aged 18-29 is about the same as the number over 65, 40 million or so, voter turnout among the older group was far higher in the last presidential election. Almost 80% of the feisty oldsters turned out as compared with a mere 50% for the callow youths. (While it may seem like a stretch to call this entire age group "youths," we are undoubtedly in the midst of a perception shift at both ends of the human lifespan. Just as we have a prolonged senescence, we have also prolonged adolescence. 60 may be the new 50 but 25 is the new 15.) On Nov. 4th, old folks will be riding their scooters to the polls in vast profusion, while at least half of their grandchildren will be wondering if maybe it isn't a little chilly to vote or fretting over whether voting will result in unwanted jury duty.
Looking ahead, thanks to advances in medical science and the post-war Baby Boom, the over-65 portion of the population is growing faster than any other. Soon, most of us will be old. Or Hispanic.
This senior segment is a mother lode of votes, one that was reliably Democratic for many years. Even today, Americans over 65 are more likely to oppose the War in Iraq than those under 30. In this cycle, they have also been strong supporters of Hillary Clinton.
So why don't we hear more about them? Why aren't Obama and McCain pandering to the old they way they pander to other interest groups?
And why, for God's sake, do politicians waste so much time and energy courting the young, one of the most politically worthless segments of the entire electorate? We all know from looking back on our own lives that young people are predisposed to be temperamental, fickle, self-involved, and lazy. I certainly was. Yes, they have their good qualities. They are often more physically attractive than older people and, if they are not overcome with ennui, they sometimes have an appealing joie de vivre. But that's about it. And as President Howard Dean and Senator Ned Lamont will tell you, you can't count on them to put you into office. The card-carrying members of MoveOn are moving on even as you read this, many of them headed out on an Odyssey across the political spectrum that will wash them up on the reactionary shores of David Horowitz-land in a mere decade.
The mosquito-sized attention span of younger voters has always posed hazards for Mr. Obama. Like an acid trip, the key to a successful campaign is pacing. Judging from the stubborn numbers, Obama may have peaked too soon. Nobody's getting laid in college anymore for being an Obama supporter (according to a recent study by the Pew Center for the American Electorate entitled "College Sexual Activity and Political Preference") and that's very bad news for a candidate stuck in a tie with a genuinely old person, one who can dare to hope that identity politics may work in his favor among voters given a chance to elect one of their own.
If the Democrats want to escape the doldrums, they must abandon their babies and make a generational shift in emphasis. They can't have it both ways, assuming that one message fits all. They are running a terrible risk that their efforts to cater to the young will repel the old and that neither group will be there for Barack Obama when he needs them.
Obama's gamble on change (which, rumor has it, the candidate himself has come to regret) now seems like a serious error. The message of change has to change. To young people, "change" implies their inevitable takeover. It's just another form of pandering, promising then something they think they're entitled to. But to old people, "change" is the second scariest word in the English language after "enema."
To transform himself into a nursing home pin-up, Obama must give up the trappings of hipness, which always seem a little sad and desperate when worn by a politician anyway -- sort of like those obligatory compilations of Beatles songs that opera singers sometimes put out. It's no great loss. There are other virtues besides hipness and, as many have pointed out, in reality Obama himself has always been more nerd than cool. That's a good foundation from which to begin wooing the old. "That nice Obama man" could win the election. "My man Barack!" not so much.
And how about curtailing some of this Internet foolishness? "E-Mail User " isn't a political party; this election isn't for President of Cyberspace. One of the smartest things John McCain has done so far is spread the word that he's a technophobic Internet ignoramus It is time for Senator Obama to shut up about his three BlackBerrys and start talking about the issues that old people care about like why there's never enough parking at the Post Office and how the government can prevent their glasses from falling into the toilet.
And no more hints, innuendo, jokes, or outright comment about John McCain's age. Making him seem old and feeble will just enhance his allure to the old and feeble. Remember, there are almost 60,000 Americans over 100 (called the "Old Old" by witty demographers) just waiting for one of the presidential candidates to come over and kiss their ass. To them John McCain is a sharp young fella, while Obama is so remote in age as to seem practically fetal.
How else can Barack Obama appeal to old people? Listen to them! Their biggest fear is that they are being marginalized. I know it's a lot more fun to hang out with the kids. But if you really want this thing, Barack (or John, for that matter), you've got to do the work. And that means going out to the assisted-living facility and listening to their boring, repetitive stories. You don't have to care! Just try and seem like you do. You're a politician, for God's sake. That's all our seniors want: someone to at least pretend to take them seriously. And I think they've earned an empty gesture or two, don't you?
Politicians like to finish their stump speeches with something grand and airy about the undertakings we must shoulder on behalf of our children's children. Trust me, our grandkids will have problems we can't anticipate. And they may well blame us for whatever difficulties plague them in 2050 no matter what we do now, even if the worst thing we did was overreact to some problem in 2008 on their behalf. Let's do whatever we're going to do for ourselves, for our parents, and for our parents' parents. And leave our children's children out of it for now.
So, thank you, young people, but you are excused. It's time for the old folks to talk about boring grown-up stuff. But be sure and come back down for dessert!