Is Hillary Clinton Too Old To Be President?

[Mac1958]

.

As I predicted (okay, admittedly it wasn't that tough a prediction).

Get ready. For the next 3 years, assuming Hillary stays in the election limelight, we'll be hearing about ageism and sexism every single time anyone says anything remotely negative about her. Take the attention off the issue and divert it, works every time.

And when she's (most likely) President, it won't stop.



The Ageist Attack on Hillary - The Daily Beast
GOP Hypocrisy as Hillary Clinton Painted as 'Old News' 'Golden Girl' Over Possible 2016 Presidential Run | The Hinterland Gazette
Can the GOP convince America that Hillary Clinton is too old? - The Week

 

[Circe]

.

As I predicted (okay, admittedly it wasn't that tough a prediction).

Get ready. For the next 3 years, assuming Hillary stays in the election limelight, we'll be hearing about ageism and sexism every single time anyone says anything remotely negative about her. Take the attention off the issue and divert it, works every time.

And when she's (most likely) President, it won't stop.

Given the whole Baby Boom is as old as she is or older, I doubt ageist attacks will work.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Ageism is an ugly, ugly thing. A HUGE contingency of voters in this country are the over 50s and the baby boomers. Hilary is one of them. She will bring out the liberal vote, the women's vote and the over 50s vote. Old news these days is the complete lack of awareness the Republican party has for what America wants in leadership and in governance. One thing we don't want is more prejudice and bigotry, including those who are ageist assholes.

This is where I have to disagree with you. I think age is a completely valid issue.

It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things.

Liberals brought up very legitimate concerns about John McCain's and Bob Dole's ages when they ran.

Hillary will be 69 when innagurated, the same age as Reagan was. If she serves out two terms, she'd be 77 when she finishes.

I think it will be incumbant upon Mrs. Clinton to show she has the mental accuity and vigor to do the job at her age.

 

[Esmeralda]

[

Ageism is an ugly, ugly thing. A HUGE contingency of voters in this country are the over 50s and the baby boomers. Hilary is one of them. She will bring out the liberal vote, the women's vote and the over 50s vote. Old news these days is the complete lack of awareness the Republican party has for what America wants in leadership and in governance. One thing we don't want is more prejudice and bigotry, including those who are ageist assholes.

This is where I have to disagree with you. I think age is a completely valid issue.

It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things.

Liberals brought up very legitimate concerns about John McCain's and Bob Dole's ages when they ran.

Hillary will be 69 when innagurated, the same age as Reagan was. If she serves out two terms, she'd be 77 when she finishes.

I think it will be incumbant upon Mrs. Clinton to show she has the mental accuity and vigor to do the job at her age.

Well, to begin with, she is a hell of a lot smarter, better educated, knowledgeable and experienced that Reagan ever was. I don't know how old you are, but 50 and 60 these days is not what it was 30 years ago. Maybe you are an ageist too? The really unfortunate thing is that Obama was elected instead of Hillary. The Democratic party made a big mistake running Obama instead of Hillary.

As well, having a weak character and allowing others to manipulate you, like ~"It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things" hasn't got anything to do with age, it has to do with mental capacity to begin with. Look at Bush: he was controlled and manipulated throughout his presidency.

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

 

[Redfish]

[

Ageism is an ugly, ugly thing. A HUGE contingency of voters in this country are the over 50s and the baby boomers. Hilary is one of them. She will bring out the liberal vote, the women's vote and the over 50s vote. Old news these days is the complete lack of awareness the Republican party has for what America wants in leadership and in governance. One thing we don't want is more prejudice and bigotry, including those who are ageist assholes.

This is where I have to disagree with you. I think age is a completely valid issue.

It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things.

Liberals brought up very legitimate concerns about John McCain's and Bob Dole's ages when they ran.

Hillary will be 69 when innagurated, the same age as Reagan was. If she serves out two terms, she'd be 77 when she finishes.

I think it will be incumbant upon Mrs. Clinton to show she has the mental accuity and vigor to do the job at her age.

for once I agree with you. Nancy ran the country during Reagan's last two years. Dole and McCain were too old. Hillary will be too old.

Its not ageism, its reality.

 

[Redfish]

[

Ageism is an ugly, ugly thing. A HUGE contingency of voters in this country are the over 50s and the baby boomers. Hilary is one of them. She will bring out the liberal vote, the women's vote and the over 50s vote. Old news these days is the complete lack of awareness the Republican party has for what America wants in leadership and in governance. One thing we don't want is more prejudice and bigotry, including those who are ageist assholes.

This is where I have to disagree with you. I think age is a completely valid issue.

It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things.

Liberals brought up very legitimate concerns about John McCain's and Bob Dole's ages when they ran.

Hillary will be 69 when innagurated, the same age as Reagan was. If she serves out two terms, she'd be 77 when she finishes.

I think it will be incumbant upon Mrs. Clinton to show she has the mental accuity and vigor to do the job at her age.

Well, to begin with, she is a hell of a lot smarter, better educated, knowledgeable and experienced that Reagan ever was. I don't know how old you are, but 50 and 60 these days is not what it was 30 years ago. Maybe you are an ageist too? The really unfortunate thing is that Obama was elected instead of Hilary. The Democratic party made a big mistake running Obama instead of Hilary.

screams "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE" If hillary runs the GOP will have a field day with all of her stupid quotes and idiotic pronouncements. How about her doing the fake black accent in the black church. give it up, the clinton era is over.

she had her chance and you fools got all spun up with the incompetent black guy.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Let them go ahead and use old quotes against her and dig up dirt. That won't help. The only way they beat her if she decides to run is with a decent candidate and so far, they don't have much.

 

[Mac1958]

.

The only way the GOP beats Hillary (and even that is doubtful) is if they run a larger-than-life home run hitter who can overshadow her celebrity.

And they only have one of those.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Well, to begin with, she is a hell of a lot smarter, better educated, knowledgeable and experienced that Reagan ever was. I don't know how old you are, but 50 and 60 these days is not what it was 30 years ago. Maybe you are an ageist too? The really unfortunate thing is that Obama was elected instead of Hillary. The Democratic party made a big mistake running Obama instead of Hillary.

As well, having a weak character and allowing others to manipulate you, like ~"It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things" hasn't got anything to do with age, it has to do with mental capacity to begin with. Look at Bush: he was controlled and manipulated throughout his presidency.

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

For the record, I'm 51. My first vote was for Reagan and I voted Republican all the way up until 2008, when I finally concluded the GOP lost its collective mind and started voting for Democrats.

It isn't a partisan thing. Democrats were happy to go after Reagan, Dole and McCain on their ages. It's a valid question.

I also dispute that Reagan had a 'Weak character". This is a man who served in the military, was a union president, a governor, and yes, an actor.

Compared to Mrs. Clinton, who really spent most of her public life riding her husband's coattails and ignoring his infidelities.

Now, that said, given a choice between Hillary and Jeb Bush, I'd probably vote for Hillary.

But asking very valid questions about whether a 70 year old woman might not be up for the toughest job in the world is not outside the bounds.

 

[Redfish]

.

The only way the GOP beats Hillary (and even that is doubtful) is if they run a larger-than-life home run hitter who can overshadow her celebrity.

And they only have one of those.

.

I disagree, she is damaged goods. Her Secstate time was unimpressive and Benghazi was on her watch. The people would not vote for an old, angry woman.

I think the dems would be making a McCain-like mistake running her.

 

[Redfish]

[

Well, to begin with, she is a hell of a lot smarter, better educated, knowledgeable and experienced that Reagan ever was. I don't know how old you are, but 50 and 60 these days is not what it was 30 years ago. Maybe you are an ageist too? The really unfortunate thing is that Obama was elected instead of Hillary. The Democratic party made a big mistake running Obama instead of Hillary.

As well, having a weak character and allowing others to manipulate you, like ~"It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things" hasn't got anything to do with age, it has to do with mental capacity to begin with. Look at Bush: he was controlled and manipulated throughout his presidency.

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

For the record, I'm 51. My first vote was for Reagan and I voted Republican all the way up until 2008, when I finally concluded the GOP lost its collective mind and started voting for Democrats.

It isn't a partisan thing. Democrats were happy to go after Reagan, Dole and McCain on their ages. It's a valid question.

I also dispute that Reagan had a 'Weak character". This is a man who served in the military, was a union president, a governor, and yes, an actor.

Compared to Mrs. Clinton, who really spent most of her public life riding her husband's coattails and ignoring his infidelities.

Now, that said, given a choice between Hillary and Jeb Bush, I'd probably vote for Hillary.

But asking very valid questions about whether a 70 year old woman might not be up for the toughest job in the world is not outside the bounds.

once again I find myself agreeing with you----this is scary

I don't see Hillary or Jeb running in 16. The country is tired of the same old candidates and dynasties

 

[Wolfsister77]

I think the Reps should go ahead and underestimate her if she decides to run and think she's not electable because that will definitely work well for them.

OR, they could worry about running a decent candidate that can beat her.

And Benghazi is not going to do it for them and she was very popular as Secretary of State.

I'm just saying-underestimating her is a big mistake on their part.

If she even runs.

 

[Circe]

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

No: you get wiser.

Old age is great, take it from me. You're gonna love it.

At some level, everyone knows this about age and wisdom: that is why we generally select elderly people for presidential candidates! Youngsters like Kennedy and Obama are exceptions, and often don't work out: they are pop-offs, don't have perspective.

At some point, death sets in: this is true. But before illness and death, there is no reason to suppose older people aren't capable of being president: the problem really is the opposite, that young people are not capable of being president!

 

[Circe]

.

The only way the GOP beats Hillary (and even that is doubtful) is if they run a larger-than-life home run hitter who can overshadow her celebrity.

And they only have one of those.

.

Christie, right? [ Hey, he's trying to lose weight. To get a little less than larger-than-life.

 

[Redfish]

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

No: you get wiser.

Old age is great, take it from me. You're gonna love it.

At some level, everyone knows this about age and wisdom: that is why we generally select elderly people for presidential candidates! Youngsters like Kennedy and Obama are exceptions, and often don't work out: they are pop-offs, don't have perspective.

At some point, death sets in: this is true. But before illness and death, there is no reason to suppose older people aren't capable of being president: the problem really is the opposite: that young people are not capable of being president!

experience and maturity do help us make better decisions. But I am 68 and I have no desire to return to the daily grind of working. I am aware that as we age we do not have the stamina and drive that we once had.

I worked very hard and made a lot of money for over 40 years, now is my time to enjoy the fruits of my labor.

the problem with politicians is that they cannot give up the limelight,

 

[Esmeralda]

[

Well, to begin with, she is a hell of a lot smarter, better educated, knowledgeable and experienced that Reagan ever was. I don't know how old you are, but 50 and 60 these days is not what it was 30 years ago. Maybe you are an ageist too? The really unfortunate thing is that Obama was elected instead of Hillary. The Democratic party made a big mistake running Obama instead of Hillary.

As well, having a weak character and allowing others to manipulate you, like ~"It is very possible that Reagan's age affected his judgement in the later parts of his presidency, allowing some of the more shifty characters like Ollie North to pull things" hasn't got anything to do with age, it has to do with mental capacity to begin with. Look at Bush: he was controlled and manipulated throughout his presidency.

Mental accuity and vigor have mostly to do with the individual not age. There are plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who are mentally sharper, smarter and more mentally able than those who are younger. Just because you get older, it does not follow that you necessarily get slower mentally. That's a myth and a stereotype.

For the record, I'm 51. My first vote was for Reagan and I voted Republican all the way up until 2008, when I finally concluded the GOP lost its collective mind and started voting for Democrats.

It isn't a partisan thing. Democrats were happy to go after Reagan, Dole and McCain on their ages. It's a valid question.

I also dispute that Reagan had a 'Weak character". This is a man who served in the military, was a union president, a governor, and yes, an actor.

Compared to Mrs. Clinton, who really spent most of her public life riding her husband's coattails and ignoring his infidelities.

Now, that said, given a choice between Hillary and Jeb Bush, I'd probably vote for Hillary.

But asking very valid questions about whether a 70 year old woman might not be up for the toughest job in the world is not outside the bounds.

It's a valid point to a degree, and I am going to assume you meant “whether a 70 year old woman OR MAN not be up for the toughest job in the world." I am 61. At 51 I embarked on a new life and career track and have used my mind in the past 10 years far more than I ever did before. My learning curve in these past 10 years has been the highest it ever was, and I have recently been given more responsibility at a higher level. I have also lived and worked in 4 different foreign countries over those 10 years and traveled, on my own as an independent traveler, to about 30 countries, often with no more than a back pack and a guide book, no pre-planned itinerary, no fancy hotels, guided tours, cruises, etc. And I am still going strong. Yet I know I am no where near as smart and well educated as Mrs. Clinton. I have no issues whatsoever that someone like her can handle the job, especially when someone much less able than she, Ronald Reagan, was able to handle it. (Especially when we elect morons like George W. Bush who, in his 50s, was no where near as able as Mrs. Clinton will be in her 70s.)

There are people, a lot of them, who believe 50 is the turning point, and they just decide to slow down, and they get old fast. I've run into a lot of those people. But it is not a requirement to start slowing down when you reach 50, and these days 60 or 70. There are plenty of people who do not decide to become old just because of a number.

 

[Papageorgio]

WASHINGTON — Stuart Stevens, the top strategist for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, declared to an audience of reporters at a breakfast last month that electing Hillary Rodham Clinton would be like going back in time. “She’s been around since the ’70s,” he said.

At a conservative conference earlier in the year, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, ridiculed the 2016 Democratic field as “a rerun of ‘The Golden Girls,’ ” referring to Mrs. Clinton and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is 70.

The 2016 election may be far off, but one theme is becoming clear: Republican strategists and presidential hopefuls, in ways subtle and overt, are eager to focus a spotlight on Mrs. Clinton’s age. The former secretary of state will be 69 by the next presidential election, a generation removed from most of the possible Republican candidates.

More: Republicans Paint Clinton as Old News for 2016 Presidential Election - The New York Times - By JONATHAN MARTIN

So, her age is all they got? Actually, that's a plus for her.

Ageism is an ugly, ugly thing. A HUGE contingency of voters in this country are the over 50s and the baby boomers. Hilary is one of them. She will bring out the liberal vote, the women's vote and the over 50s vote. Old news these days is the complete lack of awareness the Republican party has for what America wants in leadership and in governance. One thing we don't want is more prejudice and bigotry, including those who are ageist assholes.

This is funny, who is worried about Hilary's age, the hypocritical Democrats. In fact they wrote an editorial and the lefty starts a thread about it.

So, spare the idea of ageism on the right, it is coming from the left, because the left is built on using hate to get and keep power.

As far as bigotry and prejudice, you are absolutely ridiculous, there are more prominent women in the Republican Party and Democrats question if they are good mothers and then question if they because of being women can handle the job and own and on, so spare the bigotry BS?

 

[Wildman]

WASHINGTON — Stuart Stevens, the top strategist for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, declared to an audience of reporters at a breakfast last month that electing Hillary Rodham Clinton would be like going back in time. “She’s been around since the ’70s,” he said.

At a conservative conference earlier in the year, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, ridiculed the 2016 Democratic field as “a rerun of ‘The Golden Girls,’ ” referring to Mrs. Clinton and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is 70.

The 2016 election may be far off, but one theme is becoming clear: Republican strategists and presidential hopefuls, in ways subtle and overt, are eager to focus a spotlight on Mrs. Clinton’s age. The former secretary of state will be 69 by the next presidential election, a generation removed from most of the possible Republican candidates.

More: Republicans Paint Clinton as Old News for 2016 Presidential Election - The New York Times - By JONATHAN MARTIN

So, her age is all they got? Actually, that's a plus for her.

Is Hillary Clinton Too Old To Be President?

in my OPINION it is not her age.., she is too fucking ugly, this is beautiful

compared to this

actually how old is she around 89 y.o. ??

 

[Circe]

It's a valid point to a degree, and I am going to assume you meant “whether a 70 year old woman OR MAN not be up for the toughest job in the world." I am 61. At 51 I embarked on a new life and career track and have used my mind in the past 10 years far more than I ever did before. My learning curve in these past 10 years has been the highest it ever was, and I have recently been given more responsibility at a higher level. I have also lived and worked in 4 different foreign countries over those 10 years and traveled, on my own as an independent traveler, to about 30 countries, often with no more than a back pack and a guide book, no pre-planned itinerary, no fancy hotels, guided tours, cruises, etc. And I am still going strong. Yet I know I am no where near as smart and well educated as Mrs. Clinton. I have no issues whatsoever that someone like her can handle the job, especially when someone much less able than she, Ronald Reagan, was able to handle it. (Especially when we elect morons like George W. Bush who, in his 50s, was no where near as able as Mrs. Clinton will be in her 70s.)

There are people, a lot of them, who believe 50 is the turning point, and they just decide to slow down, and they get old fast. I've run into a lot of those people. But it is not a requirement to start slowing down when you reach 50, and these days 60 or 70. There are plenty of people who do not decide to become old just because of a number.

I think you are right, it's a decision! One I sure haven't made yet, and don't expect to when I'm 70, either. Energy is the thing. Motivation. Desire for understanding, our reach exceeding our grasp.

If Hillary has the energy to be prez, good. Let her. She'll sure have the experience and perspective.

Besides, she is only 65! She's literally not even eligible for full Social Security retirement, won't be for well over a year. So the age concern isn't realistic, IMO.

 

[Redfish]

It's a valid point to a degree, and I am going to assume you meant “whether a 70 year old woman OR MAN not be up for the toughest job in the world." I am 61. At 51 I embarked on a new life and career track and have used my mind in the past 10 years far more than I ever did before. My learning curve in these past 10 years has been the highest it ever was, and I have recently been given more responsibility at a higher level. I have also lived and worked in 4 different foreign countries over those 10 years and traveled, on my own as an independent traveler, to about 30 countries, often with no more than a back pack and a guide book, no pre-planned itinerary, no fancy hotels, guided tours, cruises, etc. And I am still going strong. Yet I know I am no where near as smart and well educated as Mrs. Clinton. I have no issues whatsoever that someone like her can handle the job, especially when someone much less able than she, Ronald Reagan, was able to handle it. (Especially when we elect morons like George W. Bush who, in his 50s, was no where near as able as Mrs. Clinton will be in her 70s.)

There are people, a lot of them, who believe 50 is the turning point, and they just decide to slow down, and they get old fast. I've run into a lot of those people. But it is not a requirement to start slowing down when you reach 50, and these days 60 or 70. There are plenty of people who do not decide to become old just because of a number.

I think you are right, it's a decision! One I sure haven't made yet, and don't expect to when I'm 70, either. Energy is the thing. Motivation. Desire for understanding, our reach exceeding our grasp.

If Hillary has the energy to be prez, good. Let her. She'll sure have the experience and perspective.

Experience? yep, she knows how to ignore her husband's infidelity and her responsibilities as Secretary of State.

Energy? have you seen her lately, she looks very very old and tired.

Why can't these politicians just hang it up and go off and enjoy what time they have left? Put their egos aside and do themselves and the country a favor. As they get old they make fools of themselves, McCain, Rangel, Byrd, Stennis, Dingel, Thurman, etc.