Yesterday I talked about the generational divide that has influenced the race for President. Today I’ll talk about how this generational divide might be influencing our U.S. Senate race in Minnesota.
Democrat Al Franken, an unusual candidate facing unusual challenges, is fighting to reestablish the narrative of a campaign which has been mired in talk of his past. Franken’s past does not include any of the things most politicians must explain or deny: he has no shady land dealings, love children or criminal activities; but he did enjoy a long, successful career in comedic writing. This career produced reams of smart and somewhat unsmart jokes and a regretable tax reporting error that has been corrected. And that is the sum of the GOP incumbent’s campaign strategy. Anyone who knows even the tiniest bit about comedy knows that the moment you have to explain a joke, that joke becomes unfunny, indeed, poisonous. Which is why a rather good campaign by Franken has struggled against a relatively unpopular incumbent with eerily white teeth, Sen. Norm Coleman.
But here’s my personal, highly anecdotal experience. If you were ever at some point far too young for your parents to let you watch Saturday Night Live, especially in the late 1980s and ‘90s when the show took some more crass turns, and then aged to a point where there was some doubt if you were old enough so you snuck over to a friends’ house to watch it, you aren’t bothered by Al Franken’s comedic past. In fact, if you are a Democrat of that age your first political book was probably “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot.” That book probably influenced your awareness of irony not just in comedy, but in politics. And so, you probably knew about Franken’s past “low” humor in addition to his many moments of deep insight (the kind of insight that would be useful in some kind of lofty federal office from a prominnt Midwestern state other than Wisconsin).
If this describes you, and you’re event remotely tired of the Bush years, you are open to the idea that this guy is capable of changing careers and using his talents for the public good. If you are unfamiliar with Franken’s very real transition from SNL jokester to satirist, however, the idea of a comedian gradually shifting gears over to public service seems to many as crazy as that crazy wrestler we elected governor and wasn’t that crazy! Damn kids!
That divide exists both in the DFL and the electorate at large. I signed on to help with the Franken campaign on the Range knowing full well the kinds of writing Al had done in the past, the good and bad. As a writer, I know that you have good and bad days. (In fact, I’m one of the few who signed up for Team Franken early because he was a writer, and now I have my dream of an all-writer ticket). Many unfamiliar with Franken’s earlier work, however, simply went along with his march toward the endorsement thinking that Stuart Smalley was the most controversial work he’d ever done. Then, when operatives in and out of the DFL party released a glut of unpleasant quotes from Franken’s bluer material just days before the DFL convention many expressed SHOCK! and OUTRAGE! even though people in my generation had long ago put this material in the context it deserved.
Sure, my old statement applies: vote how you want for the reasons you have. I know plenty of folks voting many different directions this year and I don’t begrudge anyone their decision if they can defend it. But the generational divide that makes Franken’s past writings a deal-breaker for many belies the fact that his current message just might deserve a much closer look.
Tomorrow we bring this local — to the Iron Range and Duluth.
Being in an older age group, I share the probably generational concern about Obama’s relatively limited experience but I will vote for him anyway.
The generational analysis does not hold up for Franken. It is not only those who grew up in the 80s and 90s who are acquainted with Franken’s SNL jokes and his published political satire. The latter reflects his intelligence, knowledge, integrity and values that make him a worthy candidate. The problem is with the people of all generations who don’t get satire, are made uncomfortable by its edginess, and don’t recognize it as a legitimate way of encouraging critical thinking.
My take is that people who are in an older generation (over 50), especially those who have not lived around or have had relationships with African Americans, will have a harder time voting for an African American. I guess this could be considered racism. I would tend more to consider it implicit bias (Explained in Gladwell’s book “Blink”). Many of these people over fifty will tend to use “lack of experience” as their reason for not voting for Obama. But I think it is racism or implicit bias and they don’t want to actually admit that as their reason. Many younger people come from a different era where racism was not as apparent in their culture and their implicit biases are not as strong. Hopefully this make sense. I don’t think it is just generational when people say they won’t vote for Obama. I firmly believe race is a factor on the Iron Range and people use lack of experience as their excuse.
Well, I won’t be voting for Obama, and the reasons have nothing to do with his race. I voted for Alan Keyes at the last GOP caucus straw poll – it’s not Obama’s race I object to, it’s his principles and the people he surrounds himself with.
Well, to be fair, “Keyes to Obama” is a pretty hard pivot from an ideological standpoint. 🙂
Can we get over this “principles” language. You disagree with Obama’s policies, not his principles. I think that’s part of the problem with our debate these days. Everyone assumes the other side is out to spread evil and destory the world. That’s (usually) not true. I don’t have a problem with John McCain’s principles, so far as I know; it’s his policies.
I think that’s a much better place to start the discussion.