Memes

45648 readers

1444 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

435

What the flip are you looking at? (i.imgflip.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

recent as in, 10-20 years. Bush technically counts. Maybe. I didn't do the math.

Either way my point here was that it's absurd that our candidacy choices are between two elderly men.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just to explain my math point a bit more, let's take the definition of recent by decade, where all presidents serving within those decades count:

1 decade (2014): 3
2 decades (2004): 4
3 decades (1994): 5
4 decades (1984): 7
5 decades (1974): 10
6 decades (1964): 11
7 decades (1955): 13
8 decades (1945): 15

Even going back fairly far, we still have a pretty small sample size to draw conclusions for presidents specifically.

I agree with you on the age issue as a broader problem. There we have a solid sample. We've become a gerontocracy at the federal level especially, with the older generations holding onto power far past when they should have moved aside to allow in new people and fresh ideas. People in their 80's and 90's holding on to seats clogs the pipelines so that everyone else is prevented from moving up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

every so often i remember that there are still probably silent generation members in the government, and that statistically, the vast majority is gen x or older, broadly across the government.

It really makes you think.