Hillary Clinton is too old to run for President. There, I said it.

[rgbecker]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

October 26th, 1947 - January 20th, 2017 = 69 years, 86 days

2 presidents started after 66th birthday, one died two months in and the other served his second term while suffering from Alzheimer’s.

Today, class, let’s review past presidential election results and see if that review can shed any light on where the Democratic Party should look when picking its candidate for the 2016 election. My conclusion points to Elizabeth Warren over Hillary Clinton, though there may be a better choice yet somewhere waiting in the wings.

1. In past elections, Democrats have done better (won by a greater percentage of popular vote) when the candidate delineates clear differences from the Republican candidate.

Starting with Cleveland in 1892, we see he actually received fewer votes than his two major opponents, Harrison (R) and Weaver (Populist).
This after essentially tying with Harrison in 1988 and with Blaine in 1984.

The next Democratic Party president, Woodrow Wilson in 1912, was able to beat his main rival, T. Roosevelt, running as a Progressive, with fewer voters than those supporting Roosevelt and Taft (R) combined.

This pattern of the Democrats winning only because the opponents split their votes, benefited Truman and Clinton, who never won the majority of the votes but secured the presidency thanks to Ross Perot’s independent run in both 1992 and 1996.

FDR, positioning himself as significantly populist and different from the Republicans, won every election with more than 6% advantage. (1932 = 18.32%, 1936 = 24.92%, 1940 = 10%, and 1944 = 7.32%).

Kennedy barely won while LBJ, presenting himself as significantly different than Goldwater and benefiting from a Right Wing take over of the Republicans won with a 22.69% difference.

I hate to mention the Gore/Bush 2000 election other than to point out the cries at the time of no difference between the candidates which resulted in a strong showing for the 3rd party Nader. Not to mention the backlash to Clinton’s escapades and the resulting loss of his campaigning support for Gore during the election.

Obama’s 2008 victory by 7.38% was the biggest margin since FDR’s in 1940. The 3.9% margin in 2012 was larger than Carter’s 2.1% even as Carter gained some evangelical votes.

In 2016, the Democrats will do better with a candidate that shows significant differences between his/her policies and the rivals. Clinton, as a female candidate will appear significantly different on that count, but her silence on wall street issues, support of military intervention in foreign affairs, support of “free trade” and perceived membership with the “Powers that Be” puts her at a disadvantage concerning differentiation compared to Elisabeth Warren.

2. Clinton will suffer greatly in the campaign because of her age. She would be second only to Ronald Reagan in age at inauguration having turned 69 in October of 2016. Reagan, by all accounts, served his entire second term with an advancing case of Alzheimer’s disease. The other President inaugurated after an age of 66, Harrison, died less than 2 months into his first term. A review of the other 20th century presidents that started at an age over 60 is very short and yields Truman, Eisenhower, Ford and Bush. I think you will find the press very unkindly covering all of these men’s health issues throughout their terms. I’m not making any claims as to Hillary’s health, but I can sort statistics as well as any insurance actuarial when it comes to human aging metrics.

Every misspoken utterance, stutter and hesitation will be questioned by the press, bringing questions to the public’s mind. That is, assuming anyone who hasn’t already decided thinks they might actually bother to show up and vote between say JEB Bush and Hillary. I’m just two months older than Hillary and I can tell you I’m thinking a lot more about retiring than taking on anything new. The prospect of a presidential run has got to be weighing heavy on Hillary right now and I wouldn’t be surprised if she can’t complete the bid if she actually chooses to make an attempt.



Elisabeth Warren carries little negative baggage with her into 2016. As a female she starts with the same distinction Hillary would benefit from, bringing people out to vote as they won’t want to miss out on voting for the first female president. Warren’s lack of history and past record that the press will cling onto in Clinton’s case is a plus and her strong support of Wall Street reform sets her apart from every other contender save Sanders. Warren is smart to claim no status in the 2016 run, but she will the first people turn to when they see Hillary falter. Other than the usual Hillary supporters, of which I should be counted as a class of 1992, when the polls start showing Bush ahead, primary voters will be searching for an alternative. Warren, Moveon.org and others like me will be ready and waiting.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Not a Hillary supporter, but Warren is in her 60's.

Not much of a difference there.

[NYC_SKP]

5. A lot of decline happens during those later years for most.

And two terms is nearly a decade, what are skills going to be like in the eighth year?

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Warren is 18 months younger than Hillary.

They are for all intents and purposes the same age when counting in 8's.

[PNW_Dem]

93. All eggs in one basket

My concern is not about her age, but who else is there on the Dem bench who can compete? There is too much focus on Hillary. If Elizabeth Warren doesn’t run, I don’t see a strong second like we had with Obama in '08. Who are the viable alternatives going to be?

[ucrdem]

98. Biden and Kerry at the top,

and a substantial second string including several governors. Probably others. We'll be fine if HRC bows out.

[Hestia]

158. And they are younger, along with Jerry Brown?

[pnwmom]

105. Women live longer than men and don't decline as early as men do. n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

126. WTF????

A lot of decline at THAT age?????? A woman?????

[NYC_SKP]

137. Did I say "a woman"? Did I say that or imply that in any way?

Sheesh. Men and women both decline, did you watch what happened to Reagan toward the end?

[RKP5637]

151. Yep, there were real indications he was slipping those last years of his

presidency ... those supposedly thoughtful stares into space with vacant eyes, just a lot of little hints looking back.

[YvonneCa]

134. Two words...

...Jerry Brown.
http://www.jerrybrown.org/

[NYC_SKP]

138. You know I love that dude, even spoke with him once.

It was during a ribboncutting of a solar project and I was really psyched to be there by invitation and to get in line to shake his hand.

My invitation is framed!

We chatted about renewable energy but he didn't seem to know that much about it. I suspect that governors and presidents have too much to do to know a lot about the particulars of many topics.

I have voted for him for POTUS and would do it again!

[YvonneCa]

139. VERY Cool! I think he has always been...

...ahead of his time. It's great that you got to meet him.
I agree that...at the level of governor or president...details are often best understood by subordinates doing the implementation of policy. But the choice of policy is critical, IMO. And Jerry Browns California expertise and experience were needed. That has made all the difference, regardless if his age.
IMHO we need that kind of leadership at the Presidential level in 2016.

[Major Hogwash]

146. Perhaps, but the type of work that Hillary has done is not as physically taxing as others have done.

So, I think she would be physically fit for the job even at her age.
If she had worked for the last 20 years say as a lumberjack, or as a truck stop waitress, I might think that a woman of her age may be physically worn out by the time 2016 rolls around and retirement might seem more inviting.

But, not so much for someone like Hillary.
She thrives on giving speeches and making trips to meet other country's leaders.
She feeds off of the crowd's energy.
So, I don't think her age disqualifies her at all.

[JaneyVee]

26. And Mitt Romney is older than Hillary.

[Snarkoleptic]

32. Mittens is 67 and yet somehow the chattering class never seems to paint him as too old.

Hmmmm.....If I didn't know better, I'd almost, kinda, sorta think they have some sort of agenda.....(rubbing my bearded chin tween thumb and forefinger).

[Reter]

68. Subtract 7 years for all of those who never smoked, drank, or used caffeine

So that brings him to 60.

[JaneyVee]

70. That makes Hillary 59 1/2.

[Reter]

121. I don't get it

She drinks and probably uses caffeine. No idea about her smoking or not however.

[whathehell]

79. I don't know. I've heard Mormons eat a LOT of ice cream.

and that means lots of fat and sugar.

Gotta get your yah yahs out somewhere.

[Snarkoleptic]

112. My neighbor is a Mormon and eats more ice cream than anyone I've ever known.

Never knew it was Mormon thing. Bummer thing is he has a chronic kidney stone problem that he says is partly due to his ice cream jones.

[whathehell]

133. Yes, this is something I read aways back -- The observation was based on

something like the yearly sales total for it in Utah, or something...Do you live in Utah?

Such a beautiflul state, I could almost be tempted to live their but for the religiosity and conservatism.

I hope your neighbor is able to curb his intake of ice cream, but I think I understand your neighbor's desire

because the church forbids so much.

[Snarkoleptic]

143. We're in suburban Chicago.

I believe around half of his family converted to Mormonism back in the late 70's.
Seems like it was some sort of backlash over living in a gang/drug infested area in the city.

[whathehell]

144. Wow...

Palatine -- You're just up the road from me in Wauconda.

[Snarkoleptic]

159. I'm currently residing in Lake in the Hills and drive through your town 2-3 times per week.

Odd story, I was checking out of a hotel in Maui some years ago and the clerk asked where we were from.
I said Chicago and he pressed for specifics, so I said Lake in the Hills, to which he replied "I'm from Wauconda".
Small world...

[Reter]

65. But he looks a lot younger

That Mormon lifestyle that some of us laugh at is actually super-healthy. No drinking, smoking, or caffeine.

[JaneyVee]

69. LOL. Just what America needs!

[VanillaRhapsody]

127. Not necessarily....My uncle was a Seventh Day Adventist Vegetarian for life...

died from Diabetes!

Too many carbs....

[pathansen]

81. Romney-67,John McCain-71,Ronald Reagan-74,Nancy Pelosi-74,Harry Reid-75,Barbara Boxer-75

Conclusion: Hillary is 67, about average for political leadership.

[former9thward]

131. Only one of those was a President.

Maybe you should average those ages. Being president is far different than Senator.

[Hulk]

72. Average lifespan of women is much greater...

Not to mention that people are living much longer and healthier than in history.

I understand the point taken, but I think we have to consider women versus men in longevity as well as how technology and medicine have more people living healthy lives into their 80's and 90's today than ever before...those that can afford it any way.

I'm NOT a Hillary supporter. Warren is much more my style, but I don't think she has a snowball's chance in hell of being elected in a general election, much less the nomination from the "establishment" and the teabagger/repuKKKe attack machine.

Maybe we'll get "another Obama"...someone who comes out of no where and takes the party forward. It's really what this country needs. Hillary would continue what Bill started, and she's more of a hawk than even Bill let on to be.

[Jefferson23]

2. Her age is not a reason she should not run. n/t

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

3. Plus, she's a woman, and we all know women are too emotional to be president

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. You are the only person I've seen posting such tripe. n/t

[HERVEPA]

21. Get a sense of humor. The poster was clearly being sarcastic.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

42. That person knows that, that person is intentionally being obnoxious

thank you for pointing out what should not have to be pointed out

but i think it has WAY more to do with me than what I said

[HERVEPA]

48. Thanks. Got it now.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

50. Do you ever get tired of all the abuse you have to deal with just to

interact with people you THOUGHT had the same goals you had?

[HERVEPA]

103. Yeh. Though many here deny it, this place is much more difficult to deal with than 10 years ago

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

153. lol, sense of humor when it comes to Hillary? That's not allowed here. You're kiddin, right?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Any discussion of the 2016 presidential race...

Any discussion of the 2016 presidential race which doesn't discuss the vast demographic change in the nation is highly suspect.

Also Konrad Adenauer successfully governed post war Germany when he was 87.

[mcar]

6. Warren will be 66 this year

Are you sure you want to continue with this?

[MineralMan]

111. And what of Bernie Sanders?

Dude was born in 1941. Somehow, I don't think age is the real point in this thread. I can't imagine why I think that, though?

[Demit]

7. Elizabeth Warren, born 6/22/49, would turn 68 a few months after the inauguration.

You can't really believe a year and a half is that much different.

[dsc]

8. There is a qualatative difference between being 69 now and in the 80's

and also not all, or even that large of a percent of, elderly people get alzheimers. Also Warren would most certainly be over 66 upon taking office which is by your own standard too old.

[Autumn]

9. Hillary isn't too old. There are reasons she shouldn't run but not her age.

She's just not who we need in the White House. We need someone who speaks for the people, the poor and the working class. Not the wealthy and Wall Street.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

11. You won the internets!

[JaneyVee]

30. Sure, but after Repubs lost the minority vote...

Due to their blatant racism, Hillary will cause them to lose women vote due to their blatant misogyny. They may never recover which will ensure us WH rule for decades.

[Autumn]

31. Yeah funny how that happens every time republicans run and are gonna lose, like in 2014

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Mid terms and general elections are totally different animals./NT

[Autumn]

62. Yeah of course, and the demise of the republicans is always trotted out

to assure us the Democrats have got this because the last batch of republicans fucked things up sooo bad!!! Yay!!!!!

[Peregrine Took]

35. + 1,000. n/t

[Ferd Berfel]

101. Agree! WallStreet-Red or Wall Street Blue - your choice

[BlueCaliDem]

10. Seriously? Senator Warren is *one and half yrs younger than Hillary, so if age is an issue with you,

Last edited Sun Jan 18, 2015, 10:18 PM - Edit history (1)

those tiny three *one and a half years don't make one iota of difference. Or it shouldn't.

What a ridiculously shallow post.

*Edited to correct the age difference as pointed out to me by fellow DUers. Thank you!

[randome]

17. People age differently. Warren gives a better impression of vibrancy than Clinton.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[BlueCaliDem]

28. It's true that people age differently, but if Hillary is considered to be "too old" to run for the

presidency, then Senator Warren, who is a mere three years younger, is as well. Hence my "shallow post" remark.

[randome]

33. I can understand saying that Hillary is too old because she ACTS old. Warren doesn't.

Appearances and first impressions count.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[BlueCaliDem]

38. That's not what the OP is saying. The OP is making the case that Hillary is too old TO RUN.

And I disagree with you that she "acts old". She didn't look the least bit old during the primaries in 2008 nor during the witchhunt on Benghazi against Reichwingers questioning her. In fact, she was vibrant and full of energy.

On the other hand, Senator Warren was timid and far more genteel during her campaign when she was being attacked by the Reichwing regarding her Native American roots - which was probably one of the many reasons it was hard for her to win that seat in a strong Blue State like Massachusetts when she should've cruised against such a weak opponent like Scott Brown-nose.

[karynnj]

156. Brown was not such a weak opponent until he blew his own best asset - being seen as a nice person

From the time he was elected, he got nearly all puff coverage by the MA media - even as he made very weird statements in Senate speeches and media comments. Until he started his obnoxious strange attacks on Warren, he actually polled well. The media often said he was the most popular MA politician - even though both Kerry and Patrick beat him in most polls on people approving them because he had fewer who "disapproved".

I am happy that Brown is totally discredited at this point -- remembering that slightly more than a year ago, there were articles suggesting he could win the Governor's race.

[BlueCaliDem]

157. Brown was made strong by corporate Media, true, but Ms. Warren didn't become strong until this vid:

That's when things turned around for her...when she blew Brown-noser OUT of the water because she explained, in plain easy-to-understand words everything that was wrong with Scott Brown.

I, too, am jubilant that Brown has been discredited and politically destroyed. That's a good thing for the American people, for Massachusetts, and for what little social safety net we enjoy in this country.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. Acting old, how?

Does she use a walker, have a bedside commode?

[benz380]

74. You know you wanted to say 'looks too old' because you mentioned appearance.

I don't want a Corporatist president like Hillary would be. I'd take a Real Democrat in the WH if they were a 100 years old in a wheel chair as long as they have a clear mind with Democratic values, not Wall St and the MIC.

[AgingAmerican]

91. Weird

nt

[LanternWaste]

152. Insightful diagnosis, Dr. Frist.

Insightful diagnosis, Dr. Frist.

[Thinkingabout]

52. Since there is so much about age, Hillary is one year and 8 months older than Warren,

you are right, tiny difference in age. Ergo, Hillary has one year and 8 months more experience than Warren.

[BlueCaliDem]

64. Only a year and eight months? Thanks for the correction, Thinkingabout.

Which makes the point that the OP is advocating; that Hillary Clinton is too old to run for the presidency, even more ridiculous and shallow.

And yes, in addition to that one year and eight months worth of experience, let's also not forget that she was an integral part of the Clinton Administration - although they later denied that in order to quiet the wailing from the Reichwingers that our M$M gleefully continued to propagate.

That's eight years of valuable experience on how things work in the White House. We can't overlook that added benefit, nor the fact that her husband chose two of the most progressive justices for SCOTUS today (Breyer and Bader-Ginsberg), and I'm certain a President Hillary Clinton will continue with that tradition when three seats might come up for replacements in the next decade or less. She's also highly respected (feared?) among establishment Democrats, so she'll have more clout with them than Senator Warren in pushing positive policies through Congress when Democrats win back the Senate in 2017.

[WhiteTara]

113. make that one and one half years

18 months.

[treestar]

12. No, because Reagan got a disease does not mean she will

Everyone does not get Alzheimer's. The other President died at a time when what he had might be treatable today - or a person would not get that kind of sick today.

Women live longer, so that's in her favor.

Reagan was an idiot, it wasn't his age.

[lpbk2713]

27. And RayGun was advised by his wife's astrologer.

... among other idiots.

[femmocrat]

13. Unrec.

[BlueCaliDem]

29. + 1 eom

[Gman]

14. Puhleeezzz...

That's desparate.

[OKNancy]

15. pathetic

This 66 year old poster would give you a piece of my mind, but unlike some, I'm going to keep my wits about me and just say... you don't know what you are talking about.

Posts like this reflect poorly on Warren's supporters, not on Hillary Clinton.

[cwydro]

16. How old are you?

Women live longer than men on average, so comparisons with Reagan are not valid.

[UTUSN]

19. & Jeb Crow Shrub is too BUSH to run for president. There I said it. n/t

[FailureToCommunicate]

107. +1

[oberliner]

20. What a bizarre post from an Elizabeth Warren supporter

She and Hilary Clinton are the same age.

[Starry Messenger]

22. I just met a 93 year old woman yesterday who could run rings around most posters here.

She started her new career at 85 years old.

Older women like my mom are enthusiastic voters. Rhetoric like this is not an inducement to voting for someone other than Clinton.

You don't do the cause any favors for pitting one woman against the other with comments about their potential physical shortcomings.

[we can do it]

23. But Bernie is probably ok because he is a man.

[Chemisse]

24. I worry a little about her age.

But I'm not going to let it affect my choice in the primaries because:

**women tend to be healthier longer than men

**she can choose a solid vice-president to step in if needed

**anyone in their 50s or 60s can drop dead during their presidency without it being an aberration (you don't have to near 70 for it to be a concern)

[Moonwalk]

87. Anyone can drop dead from other reasons as well. Cue JFK....

...Or William Harry Harrison who died one month to the day after his inauguration speech of pneumonia thanks to giving that speech in the snow. Risk of dying should not stop us from nominating or voting in an older candidate. Now, I will grant that if you can show they're really sick or having issues, that will interfere with them getting nominated, even if it might not interfere with them doing the job (Cue JFK and his bad back, FDR in the wheelchair and he went on for almost 12 years!).

Ultimately, all this proves is that we should never shrug off the Vice President. They could become president at any moment for any reason.

[ND-Dem]

25. I hate clinton, but she's only two years older than warren.

[gwheezie]

34. I'd like to see some younger folks

And I'll probably vote for hillary. Hillary Elizabeth and Bernie are forward thinking however the GOP has a bunch of younger potential candidates granted they are rightwing loons but they are grooming their next generation. I'm in my 60's but I'd like to see younger dems moving up in leadership. It's their future not ours. Let them shape it.

[Politicalboi]

130. Jeb and Romney are just as old

But you're right, we need younger candidates. And we need scholar like tests to allow one to run for ANY office. So people like Palin couldn't hold office no matter how many innocent animals she's killed. People who use the words "legitimate rape" would be shamed and forced to resign from both parties. If I were Warren I wouldn't want the job. Just look at all the shit Obama has to deal with being the first black president. Who wants that?

[onehandle]

36. Elizabeth is almost as old, Bernie older.

There, I said it.

[Phentex]

37. Who is Elisabeth Warren?

or do you mean Elizabeth Warren?

Women live longer than men and SOME women age better than men. I think Hillary Clinton is one of those women.

And some men age better than others. Have you seen Jimmy Carter lately? He's 90 and he's sharp as a tack.

And another thing: Please do not insult women by saying that women will come out to vote for another woman because she's a woman. History has shown this to NOT be true. For more information, visit the Miss Representation site and learn something about women and voting.

[onehandle]

39. If Jimmy Carter declared this week, I would quit my job and work for him next week. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

40. She's not too old but her politics are.

[Scuba]

41. Hillary's not too old.

But she's way, way too conservative.

[L0oniX]

45. The oligarchy will run Hillary because they want a repuke to win in 2016.

[Scuba]

49. So they win either way.

[L0oniX]

59. Imagine a puke POTUS & puke majorities in the house and senate. The oligarchy take over is complete.

[reddread]

63. thanks to liberal extremists

[L0oniX]

66. LOL

[Thinkingabout]

56. But just as liberal as Warren.

[Scuba]

75. Please remind me about when Hillary spoke about the game being rigged, 'cause I forgot.

[Thinkingabout]

90. Don't know what you are talking about so I will not be able to remind you.

[pampango]

95. She is liberal on most issues which republicans hate but

she also has a longer history than Warren as first lady, senator and secretary of state.

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 60% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 35% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 85% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation. (Dec 2006)

Voted NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm

[Thinkingabout]

96. On the chart at the end of the issues both Hillary and Warren are rated the same, both rate liberal.

The talking point of Hillary being too conservative is cognitive dissonance, they are the same. In fact Warren has move left to be where Hillary has been for years.

[Enthusiast]

71. +1

[shenmue]

43. No, she is not.

If you want to vote for someone else, find a real reason, not a dumb reason.

[L0oniX]

44. Is this a republican type attack on the elderly? Smells like it.

[obxhead]

47. Its not her age, its her policies.

If Clinton wins the primary we will swear in a Republican Jan 2017.

Even if she pulls out a general election win, we'll still be swearing in a Republican. However, if Clinton is one of 2 choices I give her about a 5% chance of winning. The people will always pick a true Republican over a Dino.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. I will take Hillary and the 20-1 odds

If I lose I will make a $100.00 donation to DU. If you lose you make a $2,000.00 donation to DU

Deal?

[obxhead]

67. no thanks.

$100 would be far better spent elsewhere.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. We can make it the charity of your choice./NT

[Thinkingabout]

60. You mean they will pick Warren over Hillary.

[jtuck004]

53. She is NOT too old. Her ideas are, but she could handle the physcial demands just fine. n/t

[Exultant Democracy]

57. Only if she falls on her head again. Women age differently too

If I was to say the reverse about anything I would be pilloried here, but facts are fact and women and men are different and women tend to live longer.

I think she is too third way to be elected as was also toched on in the op. We need a strong 2020 and the DLC has only presided over huge losses when it was in control. We need someone outside of the dlc to win in 2016 so either Dean or Deans plan leads the DNC going into the census.

[onecaliberal]

58. Not wild about Clinton but seriously....

I don't give a rip how they dress what their hair looks like or their age. I care about their politics, their morality, are they corporate owned or for the people? These kinds of arguments do nothing for most people. I want real solutions to fixing what is left of this tattered democracy and I don't care what package it's wrapped in.

[Faux pas]

61. It's not her age (I'm an old fart myself)

it's who she is. I believe she believes she's entitled. Not an attractive quality in a candidate, in my humble opinion.

[Chalco]

76. FYI Women live longer than men and are wiser, too! Get over it. nt

[L0oniX]

77. pffft ...there, I farted. Why are the elderly hated so much?

[benz380]

104. Don't fart on my lawn!

[qazplm]

78. disingenuous

you tout someone as too old then propose an alternative that is 18 months younger.

Just say "I like Warren's politics better."

[adieu]

80. Obama's win

was more due to the fact that Bush so farked up the White House for the GOP that there was no chance a Republican would have made it into the door come January 2009. The only issue was whether it would be the first black president or the first female president.

As for Clinton, he understood the electoral map and worked it. Pick your battles that count and win.

[Kalidurga]

82. sometimes people just remove all doubt when they speak

there I said it.

[CountAllVotes]

83. Jerry Brown is too old to be Governor of the State of California

or so it was said (born April 7, 1938) when he ran for governor for a third term in 2011. He is 75 years old at the moment, almost 10 years older than Mrs. Clinton and the best Governor the State of California.

Of course age is quite irrelevant in the case with Gov. Brown as some of the masses have since time learned, but then again he is a MAN, that is right a male, not a female.

You are only as old as you think you are and I think that this is a highly sexist statement personally.

[JonLP24]

84. I think it is irrelevant

Hillary Clinton who is wise & sharp on many issues but also has tendency to appear clueless on others & also has tendency to "misspeak" which is a major pitfall where narratives win & lose elections.

Bill Clinton could live to be 110 and always continue to be a dominant political candidate not because of "triangulation" (though he was skilled at playing both sides of the middle) but his communication skills were excellent. In one question from the "middle class" George HW Bush revealed his thin skin, mean streak, inconsiderate all in his answer where he expressed that he was offended by the mere question which Bill Clinton pounced on by expressing empathy before answering the question. Effective move that separated himself where they both had nearly identical political strategies which "I agree with Ross Perot" was a big part of for both.

[ColesCountyDem]

85. I'm not a huge Hillary fan, but I'll give her a pass on her age.

I may not be crazy about some of her policy positions, but I've seen absolutely no indication that there is anything wrong with her intellect or basic judgment-- just the opposite, in fact.

[Prophet 451]

86. I don't think her age would be a big issue

Actual age is less important than perceived age and Hillary looks younger than her years, IMO. I could be wrong, of course.

BTW, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026100646

[ucrdem]

88. The whole top tier is over 65.

And the second string hasn't produced any break-out candidates as yet, though a lot of great veep choices. So I think we're just going to have to deal with it. Obama is a phenom and it was definitely his turn, but he pushed the timetable back and now everybody's eight years older. Can't be helped, not that big a deal. Beats losing.

[AgingAmerican]

89. You have a Warren banner

Do you know how old Warren is?

[Agnosticsherbet]

92. Both Clinton and Warren have the advantage of great wealth that bought them the best health-

care money can buy.

The quality of healthcare is a predictor of health. The two women are only about three years apart, so the benefit of premium health care makes hem both likely to live a long time. They are both active intellectually in jobs that demand an active inellect. Using their minds also indicates that they are in good mental health. The use of the mind keeps it limber.

They are not being considered her for a job that demands great physical steangth or youthful stamina.

The last thing we should use to determine their qualties as a possible president is their age.

[Vinca]

94. No she's not.

Since I'm nearing 66 I've been giving a great deal of thought to aging and I'm convinced that as long as you're healthy, all that you've learned and experienced is a huge benefit. It's highly unlikely Hillary at 70 or 74 or 78 (2 terms) will ever be a babbling idiot. One never knows, of course, but why live life on the down slope? She's not my candidate of choice, but she's certainly a capable, intelligent person.

[Baitball Blogger]

97. I wouldn't have gone that far.

[colsohlibgal]

99. It Seems Like A Valid Point To Me

I think this job require amazing energy, stamina, and alertness on command. Hillary would be well into her 70s after two terms. Don't get me started about Biden, he'd be in his 80s. We saw Reagan become fuzzy late in his presidency though Dubya proved you can be fuzzy much younger.

No - Hillary is no lock to start slipping like Ronnie did his last term. But who is to say she won't? Beyond that why would anyone want to assume that burden that late in life?

I think it's worth discussion.

[quadrature]

100. health... bigger issue than just oldness

can not pass test for driver's license
(that could be many different things)

6 months to recover from a fall(really a stroke?)
no thyroid function
take blood thinners
heart-output insufficiency

she does not seem to retain the ability
to respond 'off the cuff' to unplanned questions.
example. Benghazi hearing, all her responses
seemed to be a variation of 'f*** you'.

[Mike Nelson]

102. Clinton & Warren are about the same age...

...and either would be better than the Republican.

[RufusTFirefly]

106. Your argument is a red herring. There, I said it.

It's like arguing that organic produce tastes better.

In either case, whether intentionally or not, it draws attention away from the real issues.

In the case of Hillary Clinton, her saber-rattling, corporate-friendly, Wall Street water-carrying neo-liberal policies would be objectionable regardless of her age.

[brooklynite]

109. Okay then...we've eliminated Clinton (68), Warren (66) and Sanders (74). Who else have you got?

[LiberalLovinLug]

110. In retrospect...

Hillary should have won the nomination last time and served first. Obama would still have a good chance to win this time round.

At the time, I was ecstatic that Obama won out, as he had successfully painted himself as a progressive, anti-war, and talked big about change, which I assumed would include major rethink on economic structures, and consequences for those that destroyed it.

But as it turns out, it wouldn't have mattered at all who had won in '08. In fact, Hillary may have even been MORE liberal and had MORE of a stomach to fight Republican obstructionism. Would have used the bully pulpit MORE to explain the logic of Democratic policies.

I'd rather have Warren as President, and if she is almost as old, then this is the last chance for Warren too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

114. And she's in good health; her mother lived to 92

She has an expectancy of more than 10 years of good health.

[rgbecker]

115. OK! We have learned a lot today.

1. Some think age is an issue, others don’t.
2. Some think if you say age is an issue you are discriminating based on age or you really are talking sex discrimination.
3. Warren is just as old so don’t think you are adding anything to the discussion by bringing her up.
4. Some think women are healthier than men. And can work longer than men.
5. If you misspell anything, your point doesn’t count for shit.

Anyone want to add anything?

[RiverLover]

136. I'd like to add you seem to have hit a hot botton. wow!!

But it really isn't a good reason to not vote for her. As others have said, there are a gazillion other reasons to object to her being in the White House, but age shouldn't be one of them.

[olddots]

116. I'm too old for these Hillary battles

but still immature .

[blackcrow]

117. the OP is too young to have valid opinions.

[BlueStater]

118. Uh, Elizabeth Warren will ALSO be over 65 in 2016.

Elizabeth Warren's date of birth: June 22, 1949

2016 - 1949 = 67

I'm not a Hillary supporter by any stretch of the imagination but I find it laughable how many Warren supporters I've seen calling her too old when Warren is less than two years younger than her. For being such outspoken fans of the senator from Massachusetts, they sure don't seem to know some basic things about her, like how old she is.

[Starry Messenger]

119. I don't think Cleveland should run again, then.

I don't the ACA covers leeches and bleeding. Seriously. Because life and health care have totally not moved on since 1892.

[Calista241]

120. Personally, I just don't think Hillary will inspire

Young people to vote in the same numbers they did for Obama.

[Metric System]

122. But Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren will?!?

[RiverLover]

123. Where have you been? Hell yeah they inspire.

[Calista241]

124. I didn't say that either.

I keep hoping for a moving candidate to announce.

[MohRokTah]

125. She'll pick a young Julian Castro to be her running mate.

And Jeb Bush ain't that much younger than she is.

[hrmjustin]

128. Hillary will be just fine.n/t.

[RiverLover]

129. "...Most people think Elizabeth is 15 years younger than Hillary..."

[Thinkingabout]

135. If you look closely at her face you realize she is about the age oF Hillary.

Experience wise is a different story.

[choie]

132. There are a thousand and one reasons why Hillary should not be president...

age is not one of them.

[liberal_at_heart]

140. oh, bull. there are plenty of reasons why Clinton shouldn't be President but age is not one of them.

[DEMTough]

141. Mitt is several months older than Clinton. I have yet to see his age being brought up.

Warren, your apparent choice is only two years younger.

And Sanders, who is constantly named around here is visibly older. (73)

I'm undecided on the primary. But I just thought I should point these tidbits out.

Ageism sucks every which way. Now I'm off to have my generation be attacked based on musical preferences.

[Warren Stupidity]

142. No she isn't.

I couldn't care less how old she is. focus on non issues like this rather than issues that matter is just silly.

[Samantha]

145. Advocating age discrimination especially on a progressive website is appalling

and I am not a Hillary promoter. However, her age is a non-factor.

Definition:

Ageism is a type of discrimination that involves prejudice against people based upon their age. Similar to racism and sexism, ageism involves holding negative stereotypes about people of different ages. The term ageism was first used by gerontologist Robert N. Butler to describe the discrimination of older adults. Today, the tern is often applied to any type of age-based discrimination, whether it involves prejudice against children, teenagers, adults or senior-citizens.


http://psychology.about.com/od/aindex/g/ageism.htm

Sam

[Jim Lane]

147. Some data on the age factor

A while back I got curious about age and put together some numbers. The primary purpose is to have the data, not to make a case for or against any particular candidate.

Some possible Democratic nominees, with age at last birthday as of January 20, 2017
Jerry Brown, 78 years old
Bernie Sanders, 75 years old
Joe Biden, 74 years old
John Kerry, 73 years old
Jim Webb, 70 years old
Hillary Clinton, 69 years old
Howard Dean, 68 years old
Elizabeth Warren, 67 years old
Sherrod Brown, 64 years old
Brian Schweitzer, 61 years old
Sheldon Whitehouse, 61 years old
Andrew Cuomo, 59 years old
Martin O’Malley, 54 years old

This field definitely skews older than the historical average. For comparison:

The last six Presidents’ ages at first inauguration
Jimmy Carter, 52 years old
Ronald Reagan, 69 years old (oldest ever)
George H. W. Bush, 65 years old
Bill Clinton, 46 years old
George W. Bush, 54 years old
Barack Obama, 47 years old

Not since Harry S. Truman (64 when inaugurated in 1949 for his full term) have the Democrats won the election with a candidate who had turned 60.

I expect that many swing voters would have at least some misgivings about an older candidate. As against that, as people have noted in this thread, age isn’t what it used to be. People live longer and maintain their faculties longer. Those swing voters are likely to be personally acquainted with people in their sixties or seventies who are still quite lively.

I went into more detail in this post.

As for the comparison between Clinton and Warren, I think Warren seems younger primarily because, in terms of her national exposure, she is much younger. Hillary Clinton has been a national figure for more than 20 years. Elizabeth Warren is finishing her second year in the Senate, and is still far behind Clinton in name recognition. Warren is, to many people, the fresh new face, which gives the impression that she's the fresh young face. In terms of public perceptions, that's more important than the actual 20-month difference between them.

Let's not pretend that age is irrelevant. Jerry Brown is the successful Governor of the largest state and just won a smashing re-election victory. Joe Biden is the Vice President in an administration that's generated good economic news and hasn't gotten us into any new wars. Both of them have sought the Presidency in the past, and both would be obvious prospects for 2016 -- except for age. I'm virtually certain Brown won't run, partly because of his age. Biden, if elected, would be the oldest President ever, several years older than Reagan. In addition, Sanders is interested in running but his age has been prominently mentioned as an obstacle. Raising the question of age is not just a thinly veiled excuse for an attack on Hillary Clinton.

[rgbecker]

148. Thanks for the thoughtful response. It took to #147, but was worth the wait.

If people don't think this age issue will come up during the election discussions over the next 20 months, they must live in a spider hole.

I've tried to show the very tenuous hold the Democrats have on a possible win in 2017 based on previous elections and if the candidate can't inspire a strong turn out of people who feel disenfranchised we'll be seeing Republicans in the White House until they simply destroy the country.

[Stephen Retired]

149. June 22, 1949

Elizabeth Warren's birthdate. But that's not even relevant, as women live longer than men in the first place. Thus, I wouldn't worry about either's age.

[99Forever]

150. There's a long list of very good reasons I won't ever vote for HRC...

... but her age isn't one of them.

[FogerRox]

154. Dems tend to elect younger Presidents too

[lumberjack_jeff]

155. At 67, women can expect to live another 20 years on average.

Good habits and great healthcare? I think people will be seeking her advice 30 years from now.