For the strategists and experienced folks: those who grew up aged 20-28 during the Reagan years now constitute the average age span of officeholders in state legislatures and Congress (56-64).
this means that those who grew up as young adults in the Clinton years have yet to constitute the majority of the political class, but do constitute the nationwide average age span of the voting population (47 years old).
If this is the case, why are Clinton-era young adults putting Reagan-era young adults into office from 2010 to 2016? Maybe for lack of contemporary alternatives among their own generation?
