The Truth About Mitt Romney: Why He's Running - Why He's Gaining In Popularity - And Why You Should Think About It

The truth is, he's probably a really great guy in his circle of people. He's probably noble, and honest and forthright. Or he could be the opposite. Me not knowing him on a personal level, I can't really judge his full character, and it's hard to get a true understanding about someone simply from the crap the media feeds you.

Truthfully, it doesn't matter what kind of person he is, was or will be. It doesn't matter where he comes from or where he'll go in the future, because the truth is, he isn't running for any of those reasons. They aren't even the reasons that so many people are supporting him, or why he's gaining popularity amongst voters.

To know that the reason he is running and the reason he is gaining in popularity, are almost identical, and with good reason (though not necessarily good intention).

That reason: He's just like Obama. His ideals, his actions, his rhetoric. Can you point out more than five political differences between him and Obama? I can only find three...

He's running as a Republican, he's never run for senate or the house of reps and he doesn't have a solid social networking plan in order (which was one of the Obama campaigns best methods).

I can find way more similarities though:

1. He's pro-war, wishing to continue our occupations and idealistic wars under the guise of "Safety" and "Prevention".
2. He wants to overextend entitlement programs, though he'll give them prettier names.
3. He may say he's not for obamacare, but he'd pass something just as sordid and corrupt.
4. He doesn't truly believes in freedom for EVERYONE.
5. He doesn't truly believe in a FREE MARKET.
6. He has no plans for legalizing cannabis
7. He has no plans for closing the gap between poverty and wealth
8. He has no plans for ending the Patriot Act
9. He's more of a moderate than an actual conservative (just as Obama is more of a moderate than a liberal)
10. He's got great speech/answer writers.
11. He's indecisive, combative and gives in to often (a combination we already know won't work).

Okay! I promise not to use anymore of those tired taglines, so long as you keep reading. I just wanted to help you get a clear picture in your mind of the similarities between Romney and Obama. The only true differences are their parents and the color of their skin, and as we all know, neither of those are things that we should pay all that much attention to. We are all human beings, regardless of our outsides. It's whats inside that counts, both in life and in this election.

That being said, judging by the current actions of those 'in charge', it really doesn't matter what's inside, as long as it fits in with their agenda (of keeping the power in the same hands). Which is why Obama was endorsed, and now why Romney is being endorsed. Not because of their unique differences, but because of their similarities.

There is one thing that really matters most for you to know, and that is that those in charge are playing the "generational" game as I like to call it. It's well know that most voters will not pick the person opposite the current president they don't like, in fact, history has shown that most voters will pick the person most similar to the person they used to like but don't anymore, except they will vote for the opposing party. Most do this on an unconscious level.

As an example, Romney might seem very different from Obama, even though he's really not. And the biggest reason that he's being pushed to the top, is because he is a part of the Baby Boomer Generation - which is the generation currently running the world - and he is the closet match to Obama, making him to mostly likely to capture the hearts of the aging generations that still hold a large majority of votes (the boomers).

Being from that generation, Romney and Obama both know how to appeal to the majority of voters from the Boomer generation, and I can guarantee you that is a LOT of votes. Especially since the majority of Boomers are the overly-significance focused self-absorbed, down with the system type of folks, who want to see that their own needs are taken care of above others. In just about all generational sciences, the boomers are most closely associated with "priviledged classes" (can you say entitlements?). They were the healthiest and wealthiest generation out of any before them, and one of the first generations who just expected that all things would get better with time, and not necessarily direct action. This has much to do with why they are so easily won over by Obama, and now Romney. They both boast more for the different cultural and economic groups of boomers who feel they should be privileged above others, being careful not to give one side to much, or to neglect the others to much. They also push forward the idea that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing, and that all things will "right themselves" with time. It's not necessarily that they don't believe it either, as both O and R are from the boomer generation, and probably do believe that there actions now will mean little later.

The Boomer generation was that "down with the dictators" generation who challenged all authority. They redefined values and shook the institutions. The boomers took the world by force of sheer numbers, and changed the world as we know it, while they passed through it. They were the largest generation to denounce their parents, and the first generation to become 'helicopter parents' in their adult years. They were one of the first generations to be focused on by marketers, almost officially setting a true distinction between generational groups. Boomers were also one of the first generations to officially start to separate themselves from mainstream religious affiliations and to start having sex before marriage. Boomers were the first to grow up with true televisions, the then-new transistor radios and they also got to enjoy the experience of Woodstock among other life changing events.

The baby boomers are now the aging generation, the older more "traditional" group (of their own tradition of course), who are in denial about the end of their lives, clearly shown by their lack of planning for retirement, death and future generations. Which has a lot to do with the perception that social security would protect them in later years. They are currently the majority holders of the wealth of the world. They spend the most out of all consumers (60%), by the most prescriptions (77%) and they spend more on leisure travel (80%) then any other generation currently.

I don't want to discount the second half of the boomers though, often known as "Generation Jones", who also occupy a decent amount of voting space. There are the scads of them (you might be one) who would much better fit into a GenX category, even though they were born during the later Boomer days. These are the select few in the Boomer generation who see through what is happening, and don't play the way the politicians wish they would. They have been through the end of their parents awakening and are arriving as adults in the new age awakening. They are the few who may have enjoyed much of the privilege that the rest of the boomers did, but who see a real reason for change and hard work. They are the younger of the older generation, and most of them are clearly separated from the rest of the boomers by their voting habits, ideals, actions and preferences, which are much more aligned with Gen X.

For the majority of boomers, Romney or Obama are going to be their ticket. Most are upset at the messes that Obama was neither able to clean up nor stop from getting worse, and so they would rather vote for Romney, who represents all the same ideals that Obama spoke of, just from a slightly different, more right-leaning perspective. Still, he fits most closely to the privileged ideals of the boomers, who still prefer to flout authority (unless they are the authority), and to use their numbers to change things, and not necessarily for the right reasons. An example would be the lowered awareness for the rights and definitions in the constitution (from both voters and politicians), which is clearly seen as an authoritative piece of paper in the way of making the changes the boomer voters want (like obama/romneycare). The boomers are those that waged idealistic wars, while hardly ever actually stepping on the battle field themselves.

To give some contrast, it works the same way with the other large majority of voters - the combo of Gen X, and mostly Gen Y and Z voters (which together, equal about the same amount of people in the Baby Boom generation) - the combination is often called "New Agers" - who are out there making their own wishes known. They are the later generations, who prefer to work systematically by consumer action, technology/media, social justice and economic action then the "challenge the fuzz" ideals of their parents and grandparents. They aren't afraid to stand out, but don't tend to be as "loud" as their predecessors. These generations appeal mostly to Ron Paul, the only candidate who currently matches their ideals. Unlike Romney - who is from the generation he appeals to - Ron Paul is from the Silent Generation, which is one to three generations apart from the New Agers. Though there is no coincidence that he belongs to the second half of the silent generation, which were smarter, more tenacious, bolder, forward thinking and ready to put a strong foundation in place for themselves and future generations. The second half of the S.G. didn't have the war or the depression in their way and they hadn't yet been deluded by the social security game (which was new then), though they were directly linked to the crisis of the main S.G. and felt many of the same pressures that the earlier parts of the S.G. did, as well as the pressures of the quickly growing boomer generation later on.

This has much to do with the reason Ron Paul appeals so much to the late generation of young voters. His ideals from the later half of the Silent Generation, match the ideals of the current generations. Technology, forward thinking, strong foundations, honesty, transparency, doing the right thing for the right reasons, pulling yourself up by your own boot-straps, equality for all. These all sync up between the far-apart generations of Silent and New Age.

The Silent Generation was an Artist/Adaptive generation, according to generational philosophers William Strauss and Neil Howe. This generational type (artist/adaptive), are usually born during (Martin Luther King Jr.) or just after a crisis (Ron Paul). For the S.G. it was WWII and the Great Depression. For the New Agers, it's been the Gulf War, Oil Crisis, the Cold War, Chernobyl, 9/11, Iraq War, Energy Crisis, 3 Recessions, Climate Crisis, Fukushima. AIDS epidemic, the War on Drugs, the Dot.com bubble, the Bird and Swine flu's, the Millennium crisis and the 2012 phenomenon.

New Agers and the Silent Generation also have another interesting thing in common - being that most all were children during a spiritual awakening. Now, more interestingly - as far as generational science goes - is that the New Agers, being made up of three distinct generations (x, y, z), are each part of different archetypes. Gen X is part of what is known as a Nomad generation, Gen Y fits in the Hero archetype and Gen Z is directly aligned with the silent generation in the archetype known as the Artist type. Boomers would be in the prophet archetype, separated from what the new agers and the silent generation find in common. New Agers beat all former generations when it comes to intelligence and education, starting with Gen X and getting more intelligent as the generations go on. Only the S.G. comes close to matching that at all, as they were the ones with the time, peace and gumption to go after education as a means of advancement.

The new agers find more value in families, liberty, freedom, classical liberalism, tolerance, conservative socialism, free market economics and real-life solutions. Where as the boomers were the ones who created the current left-right combo that currently controls most everything, and believes mostly in preserving liberal socialism, conservative market economics, safety above liberty and pointing out everyone's differences.

Anyways, I'm getting to deep into the details of generational philosophy. Though I hope that the point is nearly made. The reason that Romney is being endorsed by the current moderately-right republicans, is because they're ideals and personalities are a match that of the aging boomer generation, one of the largest voting populations at the moment.

According to the Strauss-Howe model, the Boomer generation is the least prepared for their passing. It's not that they don't see it coming, they just refuse to acknowledge it. And just as the aging boomers are lacking in wills, retirement plans and end-of-life plans, the aging political atmosphere currently run by boomers, is also ignoring it's inevitable end. Hence the reason they are so desperately trying to hold onto what they have, instead of changing with the times as former generations have done.

What they fail to admit, is that whether it is Ron Paul now, or a New Ager later, eventually the later generations will take over and the end of the rule of Boomers will end. Not that it means a permanent death (another thing the boomer generation doesn't see), because eventually there will be another "boomer" generation later on, that will look up to the ideals of the first boomers, who will probably end up having a "Ron Paul" of their own age.

Meanwhile, as the boomers wallow in their denial, the New Agers are systematically dismantling everything around them and building up the world as they feel it should be - a combination of traditional values and forward thinking ideals.

It's still a toss up. So far, the boomers have managed to use their sheer size to support one of their political twins (Obama, Romney). They have used every available form of marketing available and have done everything to reach the voters of their same generation, and have done a pretty good job of continuing to either ignore or slander anyone coming from an opposing view or generation.

Still, it cannot be denied that the New Agers (and those of the second half of the Boomer generation) are making a large impact through social media and other forms of person-to-person communication. They are the one's whom have kept Ron Paul from slipping silently away from voters eyes, and are the one's whom had the intelligence to continue to prove to many Boomers that change needs to come. That change is usually good, and in the end, is inevitable.

The only problem is, there are still a huge amount of voters out there from both the boomer and the new ager generations, who refuse to participate in anything political. The winner of the 2012 election will seriously be up to those currently inactive voters. Not unpredictably, it was the New Agers who first started appealing to their inactive gen members, though the Boomers were not far behind on that, as was seen with the original Obama campaign in 2008.

So as both sides race to awaken their brothers and sisters, the election gets more and more interesting.

Well, mostly, to make you think.

I know there are clear gaps in my generational theory about presidential candidates and voting patterns, though there are equally as many logical connections. It's taken me near 4 months to get this hub into the form it is in, and I encourage you, whether you agree or are upset by what I have proposed, to look into the generational philosophies out there, and find your own truth in this situation.

Either way, my goal was not to suggest you vote for "this or that", but instead to encourage you to look into the unconscious patterns we have formerly been running on, and take the time to develop your own individual sense of what is going on, and make your 2012 decision based on what you as an individual feel is right, and not necessarily what you formerly believed to be right due to your generational connections and upbringing.

Bring your voting decision into your conscious control and don't leave it up to influence alone.

If anywhere, the best place I can suggest to start is with the Wikipedia page about Generations

From there you can get lost for days in the various philosophers, commentators, writers, scientists and researchers whom have dedicated themselves to the science of generations. I find that I agree more with the Strauss-Howe works, but you might find you agree more with others.