He totally is too old, though. Bill Clinton is younger than him.
Weird fact: Clinton, Bush Jr. and Trump were all born in 1946. For some reason there's a clustering of president birth years. 1913 and 1924 were also popular.
Hmm, what could be the connection? It's almost as if there was a "boom" of babies born 9 months after WW2 ended.
The peak year for the baby boom was 1947, not 1946. In 1947 there were 26.6 births per 1000 population, in 1946 it was 24.1. But, even though the baby boom was a noticeable change in birth rate, it wasn't actually all that dramatic. In the depths of WWII in 1943 the birth rate was 22.7. In 1965 when the baby boom was over, it had only dropped to 19.4.
There's no reason that there should be a cluster of presidents born in 1946 rather than a few spread around the post-war years.
I bet they were both a year earlier than the statistics because they come from wealthy families, so they already had established homes, jobs, etc, while most people were still recovering from ww2. Having a baby right after the end of the war had to be either a luxury or a poverty sentence.
I think a factor would also be post-way medical/life improvements that led to decreased infant mortality as well as longer "boomer" lifespans.
More of them lived, and for longer
Sure, slightly more for slightly longer. You'd expect a few percent more Boomers than others, but not a cluster of 3 presidents born in exactly 1946. And there's no reason why there was only ever 1 silent generation president. There were a ton of "greatest" generation guys, and lots of boomers, but only 1 born between 1928 to 1945.
I know you're citing this per 1k like they would in statistics but also want to point out that with the population increase between 1946 and 1965, more babies were actually born in 1965 than 1946.
He totally is too old, though. Bill Clinton is younger than him.
Weird fact: Clinton, Bush Jr. and Trump were all born in 1946. For some reason there's a clustering of president birth years. 1913 and 1924 were also popular.
Hmm, what could be the connection? It's almost as if there was a "boom" of babies born 9 months after WW2 ended.
The peak year for the baby boom was 1947, not 1946. In 1947 there were 26.6 births per 1000 population, in 1946 it was 24.1. But, even though the baby boom was a noticeable change in birth rate, it wasn't actually all that dramatic. In the depths of WWII in 1943 the birth rate was 22.7. In 1965 when the baby boom was over, it had only dropped to 19.4.
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/NCHS-Births-and-General-Fertility-Rates-United-Sta/e6fc-ccez/data_preview
There's no reason that there should be a cluster of presidents born in 1946 rather than a few spread around the post-war years.
I bet they were both a year earlier than the statistics because they come from wealthy families, so they already had established homes, jobs, etc, while most people were still recovering from ww2. Having a baby right after the end of the war had to be either a luxury or a poverty sentence.
I think a factor would also be post-way medical/life improvements that led to decreased infant mortality as well as longer "boomer" lifespans.
More of them lived, and for longer
Sure, slightly more for slightly longer. You'd expect a few percent more Boomers than others, but not a cluster of 3 presidents born in exactly 1946. And there's no reason why there was only ever 1 silent generation president. There were a ton of "greatest" generation guys, and lots of boomers, but only 1 born between 1928 to 1945.
I know you're citing this per 1k like they would in statistics but also want to point out that with the population increase between 1946 and 1965, more babies were actually born in 1965 than 1946.