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.)
I'll call you a wammmmmmmmbulance.
Yep
got it!
:)
Naw...I have a great relationship with my parents and have alot of respect for them and the sacrifices they made. They were really good parents...a rare phenomina base don what they had to endur.
Your income would never support me. I have no plans for SS because I don't need it little one.
Bravo! I wish more people were independant, self sufficient, responsible and planned their life with some semblance of common sense like you did. "Little one"? With all due respect sir...I'm 6'7" and 245lbs...sticks and stones my friend.
With all your anger you'll do good to make 50 so don't worry about me.
Naw...not really...I just want justice and fairness, you know...little things like keeping the money I earn and not enabling irresponsible government teet-sucking scumbags who recieve food, clothing, housing, healthcare and pharmacy benefits...pretty much freeloading off the backs of working Americans.
Naw...not really...I just want justice and fairness, you know...little things like keeping the money I earn and not enabling irresponsible government teet-sucking scumbags who recieve food, clothing, housing, healthcare and pharmacy benefits...pretty much freeloading off the backs of working Americans.
And just how do you think that makes you different from us??? Your so called generation is not exactly original in that sentiment.
And recieve should be receive.
Not necessarily his electoral success, but in other, much more sinister ways.
I need to check it out.
Sorry, I don't agree. I was 4 years old in 1968, not exactly old enough to "shape society's mores" the way that the early hippies did.
Demographically, by pure numbers, Jones may be part of the boom, but in no way are we psychologically Boomers as they are classically described.
By the way, Strauss and Howe define Gen-X as starting in 1961, not 1965, and with the amount of generational research they've done I trust their analysis far more than the media that only lives by the numbers.
Deal with it, yourself.
"Why are you so bitter? You should be happy that I'll be working till I'm 80 (the probable retiring age in 2054) all the while paying your social security so you can take some nice vacations (BTW have a pina colada on me if you vacation south of the border...consider it a charitable "
We are not bitter, we are having fun listening to the whining of X'ers. This all started yesterday, when X'ers called all boomers lazy, spoiled, dope smoking liberals. It was UGLY, and patently false. Now today CG and I have been labeled again by some ersatz pundit who has now determined that we are not boomers, but Generation Jones!!
By the way, CG and I don't need your social security check, and if they means test in the next 15 years, we won't get it anyway.
Your tax rate is much lower than mine and Reagan got mine lowered after we Jonesers put him in office.
Well I'll just sit back and let you handle it. I keep getting work in my way anyway. Spelling Cop!
Someone's gotta do it! :)
I never said "all"...I specifically stated "most".
I have no grudge with CG...so I don't really know what your talking about.
I was 14 but per weegee it's my fault. I guess you and I must deal with it. Guilt by age. Gen X the ADD generation.
Ditto bump
BTW I did like that free love bit. Too bad I always struck out cause I didn't have any dope to smoke.
"Jonathan Pontell is a Los Angeles-based social analyst who identified and named Generation Jones."
ROTF....another unemployed,jargon- soaked, richard head who has all the answers to the world:)
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.