1SG Private RallyPoint Member 456872 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Several years ago, William Strauss and Neil Howe presented a theory on generational cycles in American history. Without going into that theory in depth, suffice to say I have done an analysis of the current crop of suspected candidates for President of the United States.<br /><br />Strauss and Howe have identified 15 generational "cohorts" in the history of the US. A cohort is one generation which spans, roughly, 20 years, and is comprised of members who share certain characteristics that either mold the times are or molded by them. Those cohorts are:<br /><br />Awakening 1701–1723<br />Liberty 1724–1741<br />Republican 1742–1766<br />Compromise 1767–1791<br />Transcendental 1792–1821<br />Gilded 1822–1842<br />Progressive 1843–1859<br />Missionary 1860–1882<br />Lost 1883–1900<br />G.I. 1901–1924<br />Silent 1925–1942<br />Boom 1943–1960<br />Generation X 1961–1981<br />Millennial 1982–2004<br />Homeland 2005-Present<br /><br />By identifying each US President with his cohort, an interesting pattern emerges.<br /><br />LIBERTY<br />George Washington<br />John Adams<br /><br />REPUBLICAN<br />Thomas Jefferson<br />James Madison<br />James Monroe<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />John Quincy Adams<br />Andrew Jackson<br />Martin Van Buren<br />William H. Harrison<br />John Tyler<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />James K. Polk<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />Zachary Taylor<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />Millard Fillmore<br />Franklin Pierce<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />James Buchanan<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />Abraham Lincoln<br />Andrew Johnson<br /><br />GILDED<br />Ulysses S. Grant<br />Rutherford B. Hayes<br />James A. Garfield<br />Chester A. Arthur<br />Grover Cleveland<br />Benjamin Harrison<br />Grover Cleveland<br /><br />PROGRESSIVE<br />William McKinley<br />Theodore Roosevelt<br />William H. Taft<br />Woodrow Wilson<br />Warren G. Harding<br /><br />MISSIONARY<br />Calvin Coolidge<br />Herbert Hoover<br />Franklin D. Roosevelt<br /><br />LOST<br />Harry Truman<br />Dwight D. Eisenhower<br /><br />G.I.<br />John F. Kennedy<br />Lyndon B. Johnson<br />Richard M. Nixon<br />Gerald R. Ford<br />James E. Carter<br />Ronald Reagan<br />George Bush<br /><br />BOOM<br />William Jefferson Clinton<br />George W. Bush<br /><br />GENERATION X<br />Barack Obama<br /><br /><br />Of 43 individuals who have been President, with the title changing hands 43 times (remember Cleveland's terms were nonconsecutive), only twice has the new president not been of the same or the succeeding generation. That is to say, presidential succession in the US has been generationally progressive with younger generation taking over from older ones, except twice.<br /><br />The first was Zachary Taylor, an older Compromise generation member who was elected after James K. Polk, a member of the Transcendental cohort. But Polk was forced to accept an agreement to only serve one term in order to secure nomination and was the country's first "Dark Horse" presidential candidate. Taylor was not late, Polk was early.<br /><br />The other also involved the Transcendentals and the Compromise generations. Franklin Pierce, Transcendental, was followed by Compromise member, James Buchanan. Buchanan's successors were Abraham Lincoln, and the crisis that he did little to prevent.<br /><br />My thesis then, is that the next President is most likely to be a member of the Generation X cohort. Some chance exists that Barack Obama was "early" like Polk, but as he was elected, I think less likely. Also possible that the next President could be a Millennial, the oldest members of which are just old enough to be eligible, but there are no Millennials in the list of probable candidates, at least not yet.<br /><br />________________________________________<br /><br />Looking at all 57 US Presidential elections, there are somethings we need to be clear on.<br /><br />First, it is not at all certain that a candidate from a younger cohort will beat an older one. The older generational candidate has prevailed in 14 elections or just over 50% of generational challenges and preserved the older Generation's place in every case but the two mentioned where they managed to push the younger generation out.<br /><br />The difference has been that the younger generation prevails, except for those one election, Buchanan (Taylor died in office and was replaced by his Transcendental VP, Millard Fillmore, what's more he ran against another Compromise cohort Candidate, Lewis Cass), once they have had a member attain the Presidency. The younger generation has successfully defended the White House from a bid by the older generation in 13 other generationally contested elections--slightly less than 50%. One of those to restore Transcendentals when Lincoln succeeded Buchanan (he defeated the Compromise cohort member Breckenridge). <br /><br />In addition, two Presidents defeated challengers that were two generations different than themselves. First the Missionary FDR defeated the G.I. Thomas Dewey in 1944 (same Dewey that lost to Lost President Truman in 1948). And then Barack Obama, the first Gen X President, took office against Silent cohort member John McCain in 2008.<br /><br />The Silent generation is the only cohort that has not had an occupant of the White House, though they have lost three contests, Reagan v. Mondale (1984) and Bush v. Dukakis (1988) were the other two.<br /><br />The figures:<br /><br />Number of US Presidential elections to date: 57<br />Number of US Presidential elections between candidates of the same generation: 30 <br />Number of Presidential elections won by an older generation candidate: 14 *<br />Number of Presidential elections won by the younger generation candidate: 13 **<br /><br />* <br />Adams v. Jefferson (1796)<br />Buchanan v. Fremont (1856)<br />McKinley v. Bryan (1896, 1900) --First Progressive<br />Taft v. Bryan (1908)<br />Wilson v. Hughes (1916)<br />Harding v. Cox (1920)<br />Roosevelt v. Landon (1936)<br />Roosevelt v. Willkie (1940)<br />Roosevelt v. Dewey (1944)<br />Truman v. Dewey (1948)<br />Reagan v. Mondale (1984)<br />Bush v. Dukakis (1988)<br /><br />**<br />Jefferson v. Adams (1800) --First Republican<br />Jefferson v. Pinckney (1804)<br />Madison v. Pinckney (1808)<br />Monroe v. J. Q. Adams (1820)<br />Polk v. Clay (1844) --First Transcendental<br />Pierce v. Scott (1852)<br />Lincoln v. McClellan (1864)<br />Grant v.Seymour (1868) --First Gilded<br />Grant v. Greeley (1872) --Greeley died during the election.<br />Hayes v. Tilden (1876)<br />Clinton v. Bush (1992) --First Boom<br />Clinton v. Dole (1996)<br />Obama v. McCain (2008) --First Gen X<br />Obama v. Romney (2012)<br /><br />Extra: Presidents who inherited office and never stood for election:<br />John Tyler -1841<br />Andrew Johnson -1865<br />Chester Arthur -1881<br />Gerald R. Ford -1974 (was not on the ticket as Vice President--appointed after the resignation of Spiro Agnew)<br /><br />__________________________________________________<br /><br />The list of current possible Democrat candidates:<br /><br /> Bernie Sanders b. 1941<br /> Joe Biden b. 1942<br /> Ed Rendell b. 1944<br /> Jim Webb b. 1946<br /> Hillary Rodham Clinton b. 1947<br /> Jeanne Shaheen b. 1947<br /> Al Franken b. 1951<br /> Luis Gutiérrez b. 1953<br /> Mark Warner b. 1954<br /> Brian Schweitzer b. 1955<br /> Jay Nixon b. 1956<br /> Andrew Cuomo b. 1957<br /> Janet Napolitano b. 1957<br /> Maggie Hassan b. 1958<br /> Tim Kaine b. 1958<br /> Rahm Emanuel b. 1959<br /> Amy Klobuchar b. 1960<br /> George Clooney b. 1961<br /> Tammy Baldwin b. 1962<br /> Martin O'Malley b. 1963<br /> Steve Bullock b. 1966<br /><br />Eliminating all but the Gen Xers, we get:<br /><br /> George Clooney--Actor<br /> Tammy Baldwin--US Senator (WI)<br /> Martin O'Malley--Gov. Maryland<br /> Steve Bullock--Gov Montana<br /><br />The list of current possible Republican candidates:<br /><br /> Peter King b. 1944<br /> George Pataki b. 1945<br /> Herman Cain b. 1945<br /> Donald Trump b. 1946<br /> John R. Bolton b. 1948<br /> Jim Gilmore b. 1949<br /> Mitch Daniels b. 1949<br /> Rick Perry b. 1950<br /> Ben Carson b. 1951<br /> John Kasich b. 1952<br /> Rick Scott b. 1952<br /> Jeb Bush b. 1953<br /> Carly Fiorina b. 1954<br /> Lindsey Graham b. 1955<br /> Mike Huckabee b. 1955<br /> Michele Bachmann b. 1956<br /> Bob Ehrlich b. 1957<br /> Rick Santorum b. 1958<br /> Rick Snyder b. 1958<br /> Mike Pence b. 1959<br /> Susana Martinez b. 1959<br /> Chris Christie b. 1962<br /> Rand Paul b. 1963<br /> Sarah Palin b. 1964<br /> Scott Walker b. 1967<br /> Ted Cruz b. 1970<br /> Bobby Jindal b. 1971<br /> Marco Rubio b. 1971<br /><br />The Gen Xers:<br /><br /> Chris Christie--Gov. New jersey<br /> Rand Paul--US Senator (KY)<br /> Sarah Palin--Former Gov. Alaska<br /> Scott Walker--Gov. Wisconsin<br /> Ted Cruz--US Senator (TX)<br /> Bobby Jindal--Gov. Louisiana<br /> Marco Rubio--US Senator (FL)<br /><br />This is not to say that either party would not nominate anyone from the list, but historically speaking, the ones identified are the ones with the best chance. 2015-02-05T14:27:41-05:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 456872

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Several years ago, William Strauss and Neil Howe presented a theory on generational cycles in American history. Without going into that theory in depth, suffice to say I have done an analysis of the current crop of suspected candidates for President of the United States.<br /><br />Strauss and Howe have identified 15 generational "cohorts" in the history of the US. A cohort is one generation which spans, roughly, 20 years, and is comprised of members who share certain characteristics that either mold the times are or molded by them. Those cohorts are:<br /><br />Awakening 1701–1723<br />Liberty 1724–1741<br />Republican 1742–1766<br />Compromise 1767–1791<br />Transcendental 1792–1821<br />Gilded 1822–1842<br />Progressive 1843–1859<br />Missionary 1860–1882<br />Lost 1883–1900<br />G.I. 1901–1924<br />Silent 1925–1942<br />Boom 1943–1960<br />Generation X 1961–1981<br />Millennial 1982–2004<br />Homeland 2005-Present<br /><br />By identifying each US President with his cohort, an interesting pattern emerges.<br /><br />LIBERTY<br />George Washington<br />John Adams<br /><br />REPUBLICAN<br />Thomas Jefferson<br />James Madison<br />James Monroe<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />John Quincy Adams<br />Andrew Jackson<br />Martin Van Buren<br />William H. Harrison<br />John Tyler<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />James K. Polk<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />Zachary Taylor<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />Millard Fillmore<br />Franklin Pierce<br /><br />COMPROMISE<br />James Buchanan<br /><br />TRANSCENDENTAL<br />Abraham Lincoln<br />Andrew Johnson<br /><br />GILDED<br />Ulysses S. Grant<br />Rutherford B. Hayes<br />James A. Garfield<br />Chester A. Arthur<br />Grover Cleveland<br />Benjamin Harrison<br />Grover Cleveland<br /><br />PROGRESSIVE<br />William McKinley<br />Theodore Roosevelt<br />William H. Taft<br />Woodrow Wilson<br />Warren G. Harding<br /><br />MISSIONARY<br />Calvin Coolidge<br />Herbert Hoover<br />Franklin D. Roosevelt<br /><br />LOST<br />Harry Truman<br />Dwight D. Eisenhower<br /><br />G.I.<br />John F. Kennedy<br />Lyndon B. Johnson<br />Richard M. Nixon<br />Gerald R. Ford<br />James E. Carter<br />Ronald Reagan<br />George Bush<br /><br />BOOM<br />William Jefferson Clinton<br />George W. Bush<br /><br />GENERATION X<br />Barack Obama<br /><br /><br />Of 43 individuals who have been President, with the title changing hands 43 times (remember Cleveland's terms were nonconsecutive), only twice has the new president not been of the same or the succeeding generation. That is to say, presidential succession in the US has been generationally progressive with younger generation taking over from older ones, except twice.<br /><br />The first was Zachary Taylor, an older Compromise generation member who was elected after James K. Polk, a member of the Transcendental cohort. But Polk was forced to accept an agreement to only serve one term in order to secure nomination and was the country's first "Dark Horse" presidential candidate. Taylor was not late, Polk was early.<br /><br />The other also involved the Transcendentals and the Compromise generations. Franklin Pierce, Transcendental, was followed by Compromise member, James Buchanan. Buchanan's successors were Abraham Lincoln, and the crisis that he did little to prevent.<br /><br />My thesis then, is that the next President is most likely to be a member of the Generation X cohort. Some chance exists that Barack Obama was "early" like Polk, but as he was elected, I think less likely. Also possible that the next President could be a Millennial, the oldest members of which are just old enough to be eligible, but there are no Millennials in the list of probable candidates, at least not yet.<br /><br />________________________________________<br /><br />Looking at all 57 US Presidential elections, there are somethings we need to be clear on.<br /><br />First, it is not at all certain that a candidate from a younger cohort will beat an older one. The older generational candidate has prevailed in 14 elections or just over 50% of generational challenges and preserved the older Generation's place in every case but the two mentioned where they managed to push the younger generation out.<br /><br />The difference has been that the younger generation prevails, except for those one election, Buchanan (Taylor died in office and was replaced by his Transcendental VP, Millard Fillmore, what's more he ran against another Compromise cohort Candidate, Lewis Cass), once they have had a member attain the Presidency. The younger generation has successfully defended the White House from a bid by the older generation in 13 other generationally contested elections--slightly less than 50%. One of those to restore Transcendentals when Lincoln succeeded Buchanan (he defeated the Compromise cohort member Breckenridge). <br /><br />In addition, two Presidents defeated challengers that were two generations different than themselves. First the Missionary FDR defeated the G.I. Thomas Dewey in 1944 (same Dewey that lost to Lost President Truman in 1948). And then Barack Obama, the first Gen X President, took office against Silent cohort member John McCain in 2008.<br /><br />The Silent generation is the only cohort that has not had an occupant of the White House, though they have lost three contests, Reagan v. Mondale (1984) and Bush v. Dukakis (1988) were the other two.<br /><br />The figures:<br /><br />Number of US Presidential elections to date: 57<br />Number of US Presidential elections between candidates of the same generation: 30 <br />Number of Presidential elections won by an older generation candidate: 14 *<br />Number of Presidential elections won by the younger generation candidate: 13 **<br /><br />* <br />Adams v. Jefferson (1796)<br />Buchanan v. Fremont (1856)<br />McKinley v. Bryan (1896, 1900) --First Progressive<br />Taft v. Bryan (1908)<br />Wilson v. Hughes (1916)<br />Harding v. Cox (1920)<br />Roosevelt v. Landon (1936)<br />Roosevelt v. Willkie (1940)<br />Roosevelt v. Dewey (1944)<br />Truman v. Dewey (1948)<br />Reagan v. Mondale (1984)<br />Bush v. Dukakis (1988)<br /><br />**<br />Jefferson v. Adams (1800) --First Republican<br />Jefferson v. Pinckney (1804)<br />Madison v. Pinckney (1808)<br />Monroe v. J. Q. Adams (1820)<br />Polk v. Clay (1844) --First Transcendental<br />Pierce v. Scott (1852)<br />Lincoln v. McClellan (1864)<br />Grant v.Seymour (1868) --First Gilded<br />Grant v. Greeley (1872) --Greeley died during the election.<br />Hayes v. Tilden (1876)<br />Clinton v. Bush (1992) --First Boom<br />Clinton v. Dole (1996)<br />Obama v. McCain (2008) --First Gen X<br />Obama v. Romney (2012)<br /><br />Extra: Presidents who inherited office and never stood for election:<br />John Tyler -1841<br />Andrew Johnson -1865<br />Chester Arthur -1881<br />Gerald R. Ford -1974 (was not on the ticket as Vice President--appointed after the resignation of Spiro Agnew)<br /><br />__________________________________________________<br /><br />The list of current possible Democrat candidates:<br /><br /> Bernie Sanders b. 1941<br /> Joe Biden b. 1942<br /> Ed Rendell b. 1944<br /> Jim Webb b. 1946<br /> Hillary Rodham Clinton b. 1947<br /> Jeanne Shaheen b. 1947<br /> Al Franken b. 1951<br /> Luis Gutiérrez b. 1953<br /> Mark Warner b. 1954<br /> Brian Schweitzer b. 1955<br /> Jay Nixon b. 1956<br /> Andrew Cuomo b. 1957<br /> Janet Napolitano b. 1957<br /> Maggie Hassan b. 1958<br /> Tim Kaine b. 1958<br /> Rahm Emanuel b. 1959<br /> Amy Klobuchar b. 1960<br /> George Clooney b. 1961<br /> Tammy Baldwin b. 1962<br /> Martin O'Malley b. 1963<br /> Steve Bullock b. 1966<br /><br />Eliminating all but the Gen Xers, we get:<br /><br /> George Clooney--Actor<br /> Tammy Baldwin--US Senator (WI)<br /> Martin O'Malley--Gov. Maryland<br /> Steve Bullock--Gov Montana<br /><br />The list of current possible Republican candidates:<br /><br /> Peter King b. 1944<br /> George Pataki b. 1945<br /> Herman Cain b. 1945<br /> Donald Trump b. 1946<br /> John R. Bolton b. 1948<br /> Jim Gilmore b. 1949<br /> Mitch Daniels b. 1949<br /> Rick Perry b. 1950<br /> Ben Carson b. 1951<br /> John Kasich b. 1952<br /> Rick Scott b. 1952<br /> Jeb Bush b. 1953<br /> Carly Fiorina b. 1954<br /> Lindsey Graham b. 1955<br /> Mike Huckabee b. 1955<br /> Michele Bachmann b. 1956<br /> Bob Ehrlich b. 1957<br /> Rick Santorum b. 1958<br /> Rick Snyder b. 1958<br /> Mike Pence b. 1959<br /> Susana Martinez b. 1959<br /> Chris Christie b. 1962<br /> Rand Paul b. 1963<br /> Sarah Palin b. 1964<br /> Scott Walker b. 1967<br /> Ted Cruz b. 1970<br /> Bobby Jindal b. 1971<br /> Marco Rubio b. 1971<br /><br />The Gen Xers:<br /><br /> Chris Christie--Gov. New jersey<br /> Rand Paul--US Senator (KY)<br /> Sarah Palin--Former Gov. Alaska<br /> Scott Walker--Gov. Wisconsin<br /> Ted Cruz--US Senator (TX)<br /> Bobby Jindal--Gov. Louisiana<br /> Marco Rubio--US Senator (FL)<br /><br />This is not to say that either party would not nominate anyone from the list, but historically speaking, the ones identified are the ones with the best chance.

2015-02-05T14:27:41-05:00 2015-02-05T14:27:41-05:00 LTC Stephen C. 457516

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Extraordinary work <a class="dark-link bold-link" role="profile-hover" data-qtip-container="body" data-id="29149" data-source-page-controller="question_response_contents" href="/profiles/29149-25u-signal-support-systems-specialist-c-co-45th-bct-stb">1SG Private RallyPoint Member</a>! Thanks!

2015-02-05T18:11:50-05:00 2015-02-05T18:11:50-05:00 TSgt Private RallyPoint Member 457518

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Very interesting, thank you for the insight.

2015-02-05T18:12:19-05:00 2015-02-05T18:12:19-05:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596013

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34154"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="ea6439ba48a2076e9447c5e8c1b89750" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/154/for_gallery_v2/Progressive.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/154/large_v3/Progressive.JPG" alt="Progressive" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />I thought I'd look into generational choices for President at the primary election level.<br /><br />Just because its simpler, I chose to look at elections since 1900. Since the 1860 election there has been an orderly succession in the Presidency from one generational cohort to the next as Buchanan was one of only two executives that violated that regular order, and 1900 simply offered convenience, with the turn of the century as well as the hand off from the Gilded to the Progressive generational cohorts.<br /><br />I also left third parties out of consideration.<br /><br />So here's the Progressive age below.<br /><br />Some things we might suppose from a statistical probability point of view, is that, initially, the new cohort will have to face a field that includes a number of the displaced cohort, that somewhere during a cohort's hegemony there will be a balance, at least with the nominees facing members of their own cohort, and finally, the field containing many members of the displacing cohort before they finally take over.<br /><br />The Progressive age doesn't quite give us that. There are five election cycles. In the very first one, McKinley has to face a member of the cohort that will replace the Progressives, the Missionaries, rather than the Gilded.<br /><br />The balance point comes in the very next cycle with Progressives, T. Roosevelt and Alton Parker facing off in the general. William Jennings Bryan, the upstart Missionary in 1900, resurfaces again in 1908, and then another balance cycle with Wilson v. Taft in 1912. And a third Progressive/Missionary match up in 1916, before the turn of the age in the next cycle. There were plenty of Gilded members that ran, but none successfully achieved their party's nomination in the Progressive age.

2015-04-16T12:40:04-04:00 2015-04-16T12:40:04-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596016

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34155"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="aaf22e58caea5fedfe85ca60fa3be122" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/155/for_gallery_v2/Missionary.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/155/large_v3/Missionary.JPG" alt="Missionary" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />The primaries of the Missionary age are, again, not what one might expect. Until the next cohort begins challenging in 1936, all the cycles, 1920, 1924, 1928, and 1932, are Missionary head-to heads. The culminating Missionary president, FDR, also creates a distortion, stretching the Missionary age to seven cycles. Stretching enough, that in his last election he faced, not a member of the Lost cohort, but of the G.I. generation that would succeed the Lost. The fields, though do show a better mix of cohorts as would be expected, with the elder cohort fading, and the successor cohort rising in an orderly manner.

2015-04-16T12:40:33-04:00 2015-04-16T12:40:33-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596017

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34156"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="4191b3035441e62756bfc05307c9c392" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/156/for_gallery_v2/GI.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/156/large_v3/GI.JPG" alt="Gi" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />The G.I age, though is really exceptional. It is comprised of eleven presidential election cycles. Once the G.I. generation takes over, the Lost fade from the picture very quickly and they are challenged by their would-be successors, the Silent cohort, very quickly.<br /><br />The very first G.I. cycle is a head-to-head, Nixon v. Kennedy in 1960, and while Silent members started running as soon as 1968, only two, Mondale in 1984 and Dukakis in 1988, would even win their party's nomination during the G.I. age.

2015-04-16T12:41:41-04:00 2015-04-16T12:41:41-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596018

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />The Silent generation is really the jilted generation. The American public never entrusted this generation with the Presidency. Only three Silent members have achieved their party's nominations, we mentioned Mondale and Dukakis, and McCain would be the third, but not until the Silent's successor cohort, the Boom, had already played out it's cycles.

2015-04-16T12:42:12-04:00 2015-04-16T12:42:12-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596020

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34157"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="82ea38582bbe798b5f33315cd5a9f95b" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/157/for_gallery_v2/Boom.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/157/large_v3/Boom.JPG" alt="Boom" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />The Boom age was only four cycles.And it is most notable for the continual challenges by its elder cohorts. George H.W. Bush was the last G.I. president and lost to the first Boomer--Bill Clinton, and in the next cycle the G.I.s hung on in the Republican party to try again with Bob Dole. George W. Bush's two terms were the only Boom v Boom cycles.

2015-04-16T12:42:58-04:00 2015-04-16T12:42:58-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596021

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34158"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="b000784a729a45ad578321e4b2e08eaa" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/158/for_gallery_v2/Gen_X.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/158/large_v3/Gen_X.JPG" alt="Gen x" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections.<br /><br />Finally Generation X. I'm using the term best known rather than Strauss and Howe's term, Thirteener. Barack Obama has been, so far, the only Gen X president, in fat in 2008, he was the only Generation X cohort member in the race from either party, and in 2012, the only one Gen Xer, Thaddeus McCotter, ran on the Republican side.<br /><br />2016, is already shaping up in an interesting way. Of those that have declared (not just those that the media has talked about), there are three Gen X Republicans (Cruz, Paul, and Rubio), one Boomers (Everson), and one Silent (Fellure), and two Gen X Democrats (Wells, and Boss) and Two Boom members (Clinton and Vermin Supreme).<br /><br />The numbers of Xers remain sparse, and the number of Boom members that are interested, but not yet declared, are nearly the number that challenged in 2008 and 2012 combined.<br /><br />One other interesting thing to note, while there are none on the horizon, this is the first year that a Millennial could run for President. A very small number or Americans, born between January 1 and January 20, 1982, will be thirty-five on or before Inauguration Day 2017 and are eligible for the office.

2015-04-16T12:43:29-04:00 2015-04-16T12:43:29-04:00 1SG Private RallyPoint Member 596061

<div class="images-v2-count-1"><div class="content-picture image-v2-number-1" id="image-34166"> <div class="social_icons social-buttons-on-image"> <a href='https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics%3Futm_source%3DFacebook%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_campaign%3DShare%20to%20facebook' target="_blank" class='social-share-button facebook-share-button'><i class="fa fa-facebook-f"></i></a> <a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Have+you+ever+applied+Generational+Theory+to+Presidential+politics%3F&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rallypoint.com%2Fanswers%2Fhave-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics&amp;via=RallyPoint" target="_blank" class="social-share-button twitter-custom-share-button"><i class="fa fa-twitter"></i></a> <a href="mailto:?subject=Check this out on RallyPoint!&body=Hi, I thought you would find this interesting:%0D%0AHave you ever applied Generational Theory to Presidential politics?%0D%0A %0D%0AHere is the link: https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/have-you-ever-applied-generational-theory-to-presidential-politics" target="_blank" class="social-share-button email-share-button"><i class="fa fa-envelope"></i></a> </div> <a class="fancybox" rel="c4c9a786af6937924e54b24afafc59e4" href="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/166/for_gallery_v2/Lost.JPG"><img src="https://d1ndsj6b8hkqu9.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/034/166/large_v3/Lost.JPG" alt="Lost" /></a></div></div>Generational Analysis of Presidential Elections. <br /><br />There were only two Lost generation presidents, Truman and Eisenhower over three cycles. They were challenged by their G.I. successors in all three contests with the oddity of having the G.I. v Lost matchup coming first rather than last.

2015-04-16T13:02:31-04:00 2015-04-16T13:02:31-04:00 Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS 596120

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>To throw another "Theory" at you.<br /><br />Generally speaking, the "Taller" of two candidates (since the television era) will generally garner more votes. It's part of the "imposing presence" theory. <br /><br />President Bush was 6.' President Obama is 6'1." Mitt Romney is 6'2" (proper footwear can manipulate height by 2~ inches).<br /><br />On top of that, the more physically attractive of the two, will also have an advantage (see above). This all happens at the subconscious level.<br /><br />People like to make snap assessments "I like him." Physical appearance can definitely affect this.<br /><br />So take your list, and apply these additional benefits, and see what happens.<br /><br />I know this sounds jaded... but....

2015-04-16T13:33:03-04:00 2015-04-16T13:33:03-04:00 Col Joseph Lenertz 596123

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Very interesting. I wonder if there's a statistician here in Rallypoint who could provide a confidence level based on the historical data. Still, with all things human, chaos reigns supreme. I like what your company is selling, but I'm not buying stock (yet).

2015-04-16T13:33:39-04:00 2015-04-16T13:33:39-04:00 2015-02-05T14:27:41-05:00