More than anything else in this season of many elections, I have been drawn toward candidates who are "not boomers" -- I've been drawn to those who are closer to my age or even younger; those who don't think or act like the Baby Boomers and the older generations who've been in power since I've been voting.
Besides, I think it would be good medicine for the City of Victoria to take some direction from someone under 30. In fact, there may be enough city council candidates in Victoria that I can vote for my own unofficial "not boomer" slate. On the federal stage, all the leaders are Boomers but many individual riding candidates are younger.
I know that there is a lot to be gained by experience -- and I'm not discounting that at all -- but that experience also tends to make people stop pushing for change, to stop questioning ("Mavericks" aside, of course) and to acquiesce to The System. Often this is either because of or in order to avoid burnout. Either way, youth has as its advantage a certain naiveté.
On the other hand, consider that many of the "not boomer" candidates are well into their 30s or early 40s ("not boomer" starts with those born after 1964) which for many is plenty of time to build relevant resumes -- JFK was only 43 when he was sworn in as President of the United States and Brian Mulroney was only 45 when he took the top office in Canada.
And before I finish ranting, let's look at Barack Obama. He's technically a boomer (born in 1961), but he sure doesn't act like one. Most of what he says rings true to GenXers like me and I don't think that's accidental.
Of course, when it comes down to it, I am not flippant enough to vote based on age alone but where all else is equal and I'm in need of a tie-breaker, I'm putting my X next to the "not boomer."