Posted on 12/09/2004 10:13:49 AM PST by qam1
During the 2004 presidential campaign, extensive media coverage was focused on all the usual suspects, like women, minority voters and evangelical Christians. But in their typical emphasis of demographic variables like gender, geography, socio-economics and race, the media largely ignored, again, the key issue of age in the electorate.
In doing so, they missed out on a major story: history will show that one generation of voters - Generation Jones - provided the decisive vote that re-elected George W. Bush on Nov. 2, 2004.
Not that age is ignored completely in politics; every election cycle sees coverage of the well-known fact that the youngest voters vote least, the oldest most, accompanied by the inevitable speculation about whether this will finally be the year when young voters turn out. But what about the big mass of the electorate in between these age extremes? To treat this big chunk of voters as if it is a monolith is to miss an important part of the political equation.
Political operatives and pundits would be wise to take a cue here from the advertising community, where age is the dominant demographic variable. Moreover, the advertising industry has seen, in the last couple of years, a surge of interest in generational variables that go beyond the fixed static-age categories. These traditional categories only tell us the similarities between, for example, twenty-somethings, but do not address the ongoing generational personalities that stay with people, regardless of their age.
It's odd that politics, with its huge reliance on advertising, has been so slow in learning this lesson, as the generational attitudes that so influence consumer behavior likewise influence voting behavior. Maybe the 2004 election will be the one that finally teaches us this lesson.
For the uninitiated, Generation Jones is the large, heretofore lost, generation between the baby boomers and Generation X. Born in the years 1954 to 1965, Jonesers are not a small cusp generation that slipped through the cracks but rather the largest generation in American history, constituting 26 percent of all U.S. adults today. Mistakenly, they were originally lumped in with boomers for one reason only: their parents and boomers' parents happened to have a lot of kids.
But generational personalities come from shared formative experiences, not head counts. This original flawed definition of the baby-boom generation has become widely discredited among experts, which is partly what's given rise to the emergence of Generation Jones, a cohort with significantly different attitudes and values than those held by its surrounding generations.
Why the name Generation Jones? Among its many connotations is that of a large anonymous generation, like a Generation Smith or Doe. But the connotation that's perhaps most relevant for politics arises from the slang term "jones'": a craving for someone or something. As children in the 1960s, Jonesers were given huge expectations, during, arguably, the peak of post-World War II American confidence and affluence, and then confronted, as they came of age during the mid-to-late 1970s and early 1980s with a very different reality, leaving them with a certain pending, unrequited, "jonesin"' quality.
Those huge expectations left unfulfilled are now strongly affecting this generation as it enters middle age, a life-cycle period when all generations feel that "now or never" feeling rumbling in the pit of the stomach - that realization that if you don't pursue your dreams quickly, you probably never will.
But for this unfulfilled generation, which is still jonesin' for the original big dreams they'd expected, that now-or-never feeling is more a growling hunger than a distant rumble in the stomach. So Jonesers are stepping back from their lives, taking stock, reassessing and experimenting. There is a mountain of statistical evidence showing that Jonesers are, right now, extremely open to trying new brands, products and services; that they are, to an unprecedented degree, switching careers, moving and changing lifestyles. In short, Jonesers are in play; they are persuadable.
This persuadability has become now well-documented in the business world, which explains a significant part of the recent buzz in those circles: many of the top global ad agencies have rushed to incorporate Jonesers into their strategic planning, numerous major ad conferences have recently included keynote speeches about Generation Jones, business trades talk up success stories about Jones-targeted ad campaigns. They're becoming the "swing voters" of the marketplace, but not yet recognized as such in politics.
Had the politicos been paying attention to this phenomenon, they would have seen how this generation's persuadability translated into volatility among Jonesers, particularly women, in 2004.
From the late spring through October, Joneser women were the only generation of women showing vacillation between Kerry and Bush, with the other generations of women staying relatively stable in support of Kerry. On Election Day, Joneser women swung to Bush, while all other generations of women voted for Kerry. Their strong support of Bush points to an even bigger story - the overall massive support of all Jonesers (men and women) for Bush on Election Day.
Of the 15 "battleground states" polled by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. in the week before the general election, Bush carried a majority of the Generation Jones vote in all 15 - from 51 percent in Michigan to 59 percent in Ohio. Bush consistently ran five to 10 percentage points better among Jonesers than he did statewide in every battleground state.
In fact, if not for his significant margins among Generation Jones voters, Bush would not have been re-elected. Bush's margins among Jones voters were responsible for his wins in five key states that provided him with his Electoral College majority - Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico. In these five states, the majority of voters in all of the other age groups combined favored Democrat John Kerry.
In Florida, senior, baby-boomer and younger voters combined supported Kerry 50 percent to 49 percent, but Bush's 56-43 margin with Jonesers provided his five-point victory statewide.
In Ohio, senior, baby-boomer and younger voters combined supported Kerry 51-48 but Bush carried the state with his 59-40 advantage among Jones voters.
In Iowa, senior, baby-boomer and younger voters combined supported Kerry 51-48, but Jonesers went 56-43 for Bush.
In Nevada, senior, baby-boomer and younger voters combined supported Kerry 50-49, but the Jones vote went 56-43 for Bush.
Finally, in New Mexico, senior, baby-boomer and younger voters combined went for Kerry 51-48, but Jonesers backed Bush 54-45.
In total, these five states accounted for 64 electoral votes. Had they gone for Kerry, he would have won the presidency with 316 electoral votes to Bush's 222.
(The Jones vote for Bush was also heavy in Colorado, with 57 percent for Bush compared to 42 percent for Kerry. But it was not technically decisive, because the combined vote of other age groups was 50-49 in favor of Bush.)
Despite the decisive role it played in the 2004 presidential election, the full political impact of Generation Jones is yet to be felt, studied or understood. While the current baby-boomer political leadership generation is beginning to ebb, the Jonesers are increasingly assuming positions of power in government, business and the media. They will vote in even larger numbers, likely increasing their share of the national vote above its current 28 percent to 31 percent.
Having reached adulthood primarily during the Reagan era, Jonesers appear to offer a more conservative and less secular approach to politics than their older brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and cousins. They also may be less divisive and less harsh in their rhetoric, having not had to deal with the major conflicts of the Civil Rights and Vietnam eras.
Their strong support for George W. Bush may indicate a continued increase in Republicans power. As Jonesers have increased as a percentage of the vote over the past 10 years, the GOP has taken control of both houses of Congress and captured more governorships and state legislatures nationwide.
Media talking heads and campaign strategists continue to focus their post-election analysis on younger voters, evangelical Christians, minority voters, senior citizens and women. While Jonesers make up slices of those blocs, little emphasis seems to be placed on the age of the voters in these key groups. In fact, it is the female bloc of Jones voters that is largely identified as "security moms." They are also a major part of the "evangelical vote," and Jones voters are a significant percentage of the "cross-over" ethnic voters that supported Bush.
Whether future political coverage and analysis increasingly focuses on Generation Jones remains an open question, but 2004 has already proved its standing as an important, if not the most important, voting group in the nation.
Jonathan Pontell is a Los Angeles-based social analyst who identified and named Generation Jones. J. Brad Coker is managing director of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. and works out of Jacksonville, Fla. (The Denver Post used Mason-Dixon for polling during the 2004 campaigns.)
EXACTLY! I'm with ya, bro! I was born in 1955, and spent the years 1968-1973 constantly arguing politics with my oldest sibling. He was born in 1950 and bought the whole package of anti-Vietnam garbage - hook, line and sinker. He got his talking points from campus "Teach-Ins," liberal profs, the media, movies, etc. My sole source was Reader's Digest - the only widely read, staunchly conservative publication in those days (he derisively referred to it as "Reader's Disgust," "Reader's Digress," etc.) I lived those years in Boulder CO and was made to feel like a square (pun intended) peg in a round hole. I couldn't stand the hippie freaks either! Especially the slavish fawning they received from the press and the other culture machines. (At least my brother never "went hippie" in clothing, drugs, and most of the rest of that crap, praise God! And now like me he's a staunch member of the dreaded Religious Right.)
I always felt like a political freak back in those days. I can see now that a big part of the problem was spending my school years in Boulder. I had thought back then that it was JUST ME who was weird, for being different than the vast majority of both the Joneser's and the older Boomers. I was made to feel like I would be better off staying quietly in the closet.
It wasn't until recent years that I realized there had been a lot of others in my "younger Boomers" bracket who were like me politically, when I read an article about the phenomenon. (Wish I'd saved that). So, there HAD been others like me after all! Kids who spent our childhood rolling our eyeballs at the liberal antiwar antics of older siblings belonging to the first wave of boomers. A lot of us in this age group went down a different political path than our oldest siblings.
As I remember, the article attributed younger boomers' differences from older boomers as being due at least in part to the fact that from an early age we looked with suspicion and disfavor on the older boomers. The analogy the article used was that we still viewed that slightly older demographic in our mind's eye as being just that same old group of obnoxious, overbearing, power-hungry camp counselors, lifeguards, baby sitters and so on that we had to suffer under throughout most of our childhood.
Of course any kind of article along these lines contains a number of big generalizations, but it still rang true to me - especially that part about the camp counselors and lifeguards. As I look back now on all those Boy Scout and other summer camps with the counselors, lifeguards, swimming and boating instructors and the rest, it dawns on me that, yes - I have mostly favorable memories of those people who were adults at the time. But those who were from the leading edge of the Boomer demographic were truly insufferable!
Sadly, I only remember ever reading one article of that nature. Too bad the author of this new "Jones" article didn't talk about any of this. One thing he's got right though is that we truly are a "hidden demographic" in many ways.
I've spent decades now apologizing to other generations on behalf of "My Fellow Boomers". It would be wonderful if we could all "get a divorce" from the older half of our Demographic Pigeon Hole! Yeah!
Another thing I notice the author missed --- The 1946-1953 group would have been weighted heavily toward firstborn kids and middle kids, and the 1954-1965 group with middle kids and youngest children. So, "birth order" might be a significant factor in this difference. All in all, I think this author puts too much weight on "the Reagan factor". In fact, that wasn't a factor at all for me, because I was a conservative in most ways for 15 years before RR took office!
Also, since the older wave went heavily into "anti-establishment" (read, "anti-parents") politics that led them into liberalism, that old saying about "younger siblings feeling the need to exert their own individuality and a separate identity from their older siblings" might have been a big part of it.
Anyway, great article! I don't know if I like at all the "Joneser" moniker. Ugh! But I suppose it's better than others they could come up with! Like "Lil' Boomers" or "Boomies" or "Boomlets" ... ad nauseum.
slang term "jones'": a craving for someone or something.
Aha! So after wondering about it for 31 years now, I finally understand the meaning of that Cheech & Chong song --- "Bassetball Jones. I gotta Bassetball Jones. I gotta Bassetball Jones, so baby, oo-woo-woooo".
One last note here ... to our great shame, the vast majority of the Jonesers followed the Boomers down the path of The Sexual Revolution, even if we refused to follow their lead in many other things. I remember being in a discussion in a Christian singles group in the early 80s where I was the only guy defending abstinence before marriage. Sad!
Flame wars are best as a spectator sport. :-)
Very true, and looking back I don't think it was peer pressure that made me feel that way. But the teachers and the movies and the music . . .
Great post, btw.
"Oh Baby
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo"
LOL, I LOVE THAT SONG!
Your post is so great, I must quote many parts of it:
"My sole source was Reader's Digest..."
It's all you really need! It would be great to see that mag have a great revival.
"Another thing I notice the author missed --- The 1946-1953 group would have been weighted heavily toward firstborn kids and middle kids, and the 1954-1965 group with middle kids and youngest children. So, "birth order" might be a significant factor in this difference."
Yes, yes, excellent point! In hubby's family, for example, this would be key.
"So after wondering about it for 31 years now, I finally understand the meaning of that Cheech & Chong song --- "Bassetball Jones."
Twice on this thread I get to say: I LOVE That song! I think it was very forward looking, basketball was not such a popular sport when that song came out, but since so many of the great bballers came from the ghetto, I think it told a tale of things to come.
And I kind of like the "jones" label, remember the band "jesus jones"? I don't know if this is true or not, but I heard that they chose their name based on the most common first and last names in the world. Really not sure how they were defining "jesus".
Let the other generations keep up with us, that's what I say.
I never heard of this before...what great news!
Well, some folks just have to be the ONLY true believers in conservatism, I suppose. But c'mon, let's not slip in the subtle knives here. There are certainly folks from both sides of the aisle on this thread talking down an entire generation when they don't mean the whole group, just the ones who are mucking things up for everyone else.
Thanks! I like your posts too. (Like that one where you answered someone who had whined, "When was the last time Buddhists made war on anyone?")
Boy, are we going to ever get swelled heads over this election, eh? We'll never let the other generations forget that it was us who kept Dubya in the White House! And this was also the only generation whose women voted for Dubya. Hold your head high!
Thank you! BTW, could you add me to your ping list?
You're kidding - Me too! My first car ever (bought it in 1976 for $350) was a white 1965 Ford Econoline Van with a total of 6 doors on it. Got GREAT mileage too - 120 miles to the gallon! (Of oil, that is. The gas mileage wasn't so good, though). Then in 1979 I had a fulltime job and decided it was time to move on up in the world. So I bought a 1966 green Ford Econoline Van with 8 doors total, for $400. Now that is what I call really living in style!
"Generation Jones (40-49 yr.olds): Kerry 48% Bush 51%"
Looks to me like the criminal "boomers" on yesterdays thread, discounted all of us who were born in 53-54.
Rotflmao!
See ya in the morning fellow FReeloader:)
:)
Generation Y (18-24 yr.olds): Kerry 59% Bush 40%
Generation X (25-39 yr olds): Kerry 50% Bush 48%
Generation Jones (40-49 yr.olds): Kerry 48% Bush 51%
Baby Boomers (50-59 yr. olds): Kerry 52% Bush 47%
Mature Generation (60 and older): Kerry 51% Bush 49%
OK, so supposedly the Joneses were +3% for Bush, and the others were all negative for Bush, namely -19%, -2%, -5% and -2%. Now, in the total vote combined, Bush won by around 2.5%, right? So when the Joneses are only 26% of the voters, how can it be any way possible that their +3 margin can be offset by -19, -2, -5 and -2 for the other generations and still all add up to an overal margin of 2.5% for Dubya? It's impossible! The Joneses would have to be over 90% of the voters, not 26%.
I like to get in one every now and then. This Gen X chest beating crowd makes me think of a group of college football fans. They get rabid and put down the other team. Yet these fans aren't even on the field and never went to the college.
I don't know any generation that is great in and of itself.
Well a lesson in specifics would go like this.
"The free love hippy dope smoking draft dodgers suck! And due to the MSM they appeared to be an entire generation but in reality was a microscopic percentage of the population bent on doing as they please." Acceptable.
"Baby boomers are free love hippy dope smoking draft dodgers and they suck!" Unacceptable.
See the difference?
Howdy.
Mine was a 68 panel version I bought in 73. It was painted flat black primer and had a canopy from an F84 mounted on the roof. I gave $300 for it. I only had for a couple of months and sold it to a guy that had to have it for $600. I was in the USAF at the time so I needed money worse than a second vehicle.
My brother was born in 48 and I was born in 54. Your story is shockingly familiar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.