Goodbye Boomers, Goodbye Election

My timing, which is usually very poor, seems to be right on the mark for a change. My editorial of 8/4/12, which warned Mitt Romney of the dangers of ignoring the baby boomers, was published just days before the Republican presidential candidate did just that. He chose Paul Ryan as his running mate, a man who wishes to privatize social security and turn medicare into a voucher system.

Romney has quite possibly done nothing less than cost himself the election. He was poised to win by capitalizing on the country's poor economy and high unemployment. Now he is likely to lose because he will alienate the boomers.

It is very hard to come up with a scenario whereby the Republicans take the White House without winning Florida. And, Romney cannot take Florida without winning over a large majority of the state's many seniors who will view Ryan's, and therefore Romney's, economic plans with distrust, if not outright fear.

Even if Ryan can help Romney take Wisconsin (a possibility that is doubtful at best; Wisconsin has not gone Republican in a presidential election since Ronald Regan) the gain of 10 Badger State electoral votes pales in comparison with the loss of the Sunshine State's 29.

In all fairness, Ryan's plans to downscale social security and medicare would not affect those boomers who have already seen their 58th birthday. What he is effectively trying to do is split the boomer vote in half, between those boomers born on or before 1954 with those born after that year.

The attempt is not likely to succeed. A 57 year old boomer is not any more likely to embrace Ryan's plans than is a 58 year old.

In essence, Romney's selection was a poor one. He may well have solidified his base by selecting a Tea Party favorite. But, in doing so, he ignored the concerns of the baby boomers and thereby put his presidential campaign in serious trouble.

Don't Ignore the Baby Boomers

The US unemployment rate has hit 8.3 percent and that has to be bad news for President Barack Obama . As I've stated many times, that is the number that should be keeping him awake at night. As unemployment inches upward, the likelihood of his reelection drops.

Mitt Romney can certainly capitalize on this increasingly distressing jobless rate. He needs only to convince voters that he can help solve the problem if they will just replace the sitting president with the former governor from Massachusetts.

However, Romney needs to do something else. He has to convince the Baby Boomers - those voters born between 1946 and 1964 - that he will not attempt to significantly alter the rules for receiving social security. There were approximately 76 million Americans born during those years and those who did not lose their lives in either the Vietnam War or to more natural causes are either already receiving social security payments or are on the verge of retirement. If they believe for a moment that Romney intends to either eliminate or privatize social security, or even to raise the retirement age just when they can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel, they will vote for Obama. They have seen their investments and savings diminish in the economic troubles of recent years and they are definitely counting on social security to help pay for their food and housing during their remaining years.

The Boomers might accept slightly diminished monthly payments, if done in conjunction with an overall move to balance the federal budget. But even that would only be accepted in an atmosphere of shared sacrifice and fiscal responsibility. And they would not help elect anyone who would attempt to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly.

Mitt Romney ignores this huge voting block at his own peril. He has the unemployment rate working in his favor, but he needs to reassure the Baby Boomers if he is to win the November election.