More than half of these people are over 30. None are younger than 25.

All of the founding fathers save for Adams and Washington were younger than this when the declaration of independence was signed.

What makes them privileged though?
Can we get a % through the typical expected lifespan for comparison
- Life expectancy is largely a measure of infant and juvenile mortality.
  The founding fathers for example:
  John Adams - 90
  Samuel Adams - 81
  Ben Franklin - 84
  Alexander Hamilton - 49
  John Hancock - 56
  Patrick Henry - 63
  John Jay - 83
  Thomas Jefferson - 83
  Richard Henry Lee - 62
  Robert Livingston - 66
  James Madison - 85
  George Mason - 66
  Robert Morris - 72
  Peyton Randolph - 54
  Roger Sherman - 72
  George Washington - 67
  James Wilson - 55
  If you picked a random group of well off Americans today I don't think the ages when they died would look much dissimilar to this.
- If you survived childhood, there was a decent chance you’d live to your 60s, IIRC. Obviously disease and injury were more dangerous, but childhood killed off those most likely to succumb to disease.
- Why? It's not like you get smarter in your 20s if you have a higher life expectancy. Potentially living to 85 doesn't give you more expirence. Im your 20s you have about 20-29 years of life expirence and knowledge regardless of how old you live.
- How does that matter when talking about being fit for government?

Weird that it is now radical to be a good person.

Omg!!! Not a single decrepit old white man!!! What are we going to do!

Vote NYC!

I prefer the old crusty people who either sat by and did nothing or played an active role in the economic inequality in the US becoming worse than pre-Revolution France.

Imagine being more greedy and self-absorbed than Louis IVX, but just one of many oligarchs whose only motivation is your own enrichment even if it kills the entire planet.

Not a single FDR among them. Not one that cares enough to try to stop it.

What's that Roman numeral meant to be?
- IVX? The weirdest way of writing "6"
- Louis 41

Holy shit! Ambitious young people who know their shit! What... what a shame...? (Is this supposed to be bad?)

I thought political experience made you part of the swamp and the deep state. Now we want political experience? How does one go about gaining experience without running in the first place?

Same way you get experience before your first job, or a good credit score before your first loan. Duh
- Rich and White. Fuck. Every fucking time.

As opposed to the rich right-wing dusty old nutcases who are currently there, you mean?

Agreed, however a young, downtown leftist knows as little about my working class issues as the billionaire does. I live in Toronto where we are run by clueless leftists who ignore the real issues and they just virtual signal and talk about foreign issues instead of housing and food costs

I belonged to a small left-wing party in my own country where the oldies (the party was born from the union of parties which dated back to before the anti-Fascist Revolution in my country, which was more than 50 years ago) kinda decided to pass the baton to the younger generation and almost as one stepped aside and passed control to mainly 20-something years olds, all of whom scions of the Middle Class.

The result was that the party went up in votes when the Left had a resurgence, got into an informal coalition with the mainstream supposedly (but not really) center-left party in Government, to keep the right-wing one out of power, and after that in a period of two elections collapsed to the lowest vote ever.

As I see it, the party leadership lacked experience (being all from a narrow social circle and lacking all both broad and long life experience) and didn't even have a concrete pre-made Ideology to guide them like, say, the old-fashioned Communists or even the Neoliberals have, because they dropped the strength of ideology of the old guard when they took over and instead just made it up as they went with no strong anchoring on fundamental Principles or a well thought framework, so ended up copying stuff they saw on the Net from Anglo-Saxon countries which was basically right-wing shit disguised as left-wing (i.e. for example "Equality" by treating people differently depending of the genes they were born with, aka Identity Politics), were easily manipulated and outsmarted by the mainstream party leadership and wouldn't really spot social or economic problems until they had hit their narrow socio-economic segment for a while, or have well-thought strategies to solve them, ending up being just another bunch of politicians making the same promises as the rest (which means that outside the party faithful they had trouble gaining trust from the electorate who just saw them as people who sounded the same as the rest.

IMHO, I think left-wing movements need variety both on the ages of the people involved and their backgrounds in socio-economic terms and life experience, to avoid falling into political traps, becoming little more than groupthink circle-jerks and being disconnected from most of society - being left-wing means working for the many rather than the few, so you should probably have people from all over and of all kinds, in positions within the movement were they're actually participating in setting the direction of that movement, rather than having only a narrow age range, socio-economic background or path in life in control.

The fetishization of youth is narrow-minded and self-defeating for a left-wing party, especially nowadays, when most young people grew up under Neoliberalism thus have interiorised as "the way things are" many economic and social practices they grew up with which really aren't "the only way to do it" just the way things have been done in the last 5 decades, and have never thought about Politics in Power Dynamics terms since, unlike in the old days, there is very little talk of non-Governmental forms of Power in present day politics.

This is just as true for the fetishization of old age, social class or educational level - it's not a specific age range, socio-economic origin or path in life that's the problem, it's the narrowing of ideas, perspectives and sources of information that is the result of one group monopolizing the discussion and decision-making.

And still older than the children they got to destroy the country through DOGE.

I'd rather have these young, competent people aiming to make people's lives better than those younger, completely incompetent DOGE incels breaking basic services and leaking people's sensitve data.

USA is going to be so different when the old people go to grave...

Goes for more than just the USA ofc., but you guys put it on display. ^^

That's not how progress works. You don't make change through "a generation ending". A generation is shit we made up to put a bunch of people in buckets without any material reason for the cutoff. It's a tool of media/cultural narrative and nothing more.
Thinking that centuries long class conflicts will change by "waiting" until older working class people die? Funny how waiting and doing nothing through your best labor years is what you're hoping will lead to change. Weird.
Don't expect change without you working for change. And, it's clear at this point, that's not going to be possible through the existing systems of government and economic structure.
So, please, stop waiting for your parents to die to realize what they didn't. That they were too tired and old learn that lesson. So they jump into politics near retirement and have lost all connection to the progress those better have made.
"They look scary". We must have "gone too far" since then. So you blindly vote for the politician that gives you the most comfort.
Boomers are there now. The other generations will all follow - until we don't. And when we don't. That's a very exciting time. My hope is not for the old generation to die. But that the current generation in their "labor years" are radicalized enough to bring about foundation changing progress.
- I understand what you mean by this but I'd like to disagree a little.
  Yes a generation is an arbitrary categorization that will have exceptions, but a group of peers born without a 15 year window will have similar expirences. We are shaped by our environments. The struggles, the media, and even the economy is going to have an impact on how these people interact with the world.
  Looking at the Baby boomers they are or were a statistically significant generation. Their numbers were huge due to the post war rise in birth rates. Even if you disagree with the arbitrary grouping, you can't dismiss the sharp increase in number of births.
  Now on to politics. These large group of people born in the years following world war 2 keep electing individuals near their age. Out of the last 5 presidents all were born within 5 years of each other. Hell 3 of them were born the same year. Except for the Obama years every president for the past 30 years was born in the 1940s that's insane.
- I get you. When we zoom out over history, change does actually happen, just at a slower pace than we like. The people below the current figureheads have at least slightly different plans and much less clout. Things are going to change soon. Few years, can't say exactly.
  Edit: I am deliberately very general in this analysis.
Naw, AI is here to pass along all their beliefs. Their lies, propaganda, bullshit, etc. will live on forever. Why do you think they have such a boner for it.
There's more old people coming up behind them.
- Yep. Humanity didn't evolve overnight and every generation has this scum.