Older people running for President

[Hrhpd]

I read an article a couple of weeks ago that the medical community was re-looking at the definition of age and that age should not be based on chronological years but health years. There are very, very healthy 90 year olds (look at how sharp President Bush remained, skydiving at 90) and how sharp McCain remained until his death. Then there are very ill 40 year olds with early onset alzheimers, dementia, and other diseases.

For President, I look at their health age. Are they fit, are they making sound judgements, how has their recent voting record and un-scripted speeches been? I actually prefer an older, experienced stateman, that knows how to deal with the rest of the world at the top. A person that understands the very intricate details of very complex issues like national security and won't accidently blab classified information to our enemies. Experience in that job is critical.

Now Congress, I love to see a mix of ages, from the fresh ideas of Ocasio Cortez to the guidance and teachings of the more experienced. I may not agree with all the young people elected, but they stir things up and make people think. Congress is a great place for that. Not so much the presidency.

 

[tvguy]

I read an article a couple of weeks ago that the medical community was re-looking at the definition of age and that age should not be based on chronological years but health years. There are very, very healthy 90 year olds (look at how sharp President Bush remained, skydiving at 90) and how sharp McCain remained until his death. Then there are very ill 40 year olds with early onset alzheimers, dementia, and other diseases.

For President, I look at their health age. Are they fit, are they making sound judgements, how has their recent voting record and un-scripted speeches been? I actually prefer an older, experienced stateman, that knows how to deal with the rest of the world at the top. Experience in that job is critical. Now Congress, I love to see a mix of ages, from the fresh ideas of Ocasio Cortez to the guidance and teachings of the more experienced. I may not agree with all the young people elected, but they stir things up and make people think. Congress is a great place for that. Not so much the presidency.

Exactly.

 

[mnrose]

I don't have anything against older people running for President. But, I do consider their age in the context of their overall health. I want a healthy, vibrant person as my Commander-in-Chief, and someone with an older chronological age can still be vibrant and healthy. Heck, I am 60 and run a 5K faster than the average 25 year old woman. True story.

I look at a candidate's family health history when they are older. For example, did a parent have Alzheimers? We know there is a strong genetic predisposition to that illness. Take John McCain. Aside from his cancer, his genetics were very, very good. Heck, his mother is still alive!

I do think it would be terribly wrong to impose a hard and fast age limitation on the ability to run. Let people decide at the ballot box. It is, however, absolutely fair game to consider a candidate's health in the equation, which is why I think all serious contenders for that office should be required to submit to an independent medical evaluation (maybe at Walter Reed?), the results of which are made public to the American people.

 

[tcufrog]

I was only 6 when JFK was assassinated, but I was alive. The documents that were released in 2013....that were sealed for 50 years after his death, kind of reveal that JFK was pretty heavily medicated. Reagan remember, was very big on delegating responsibilities, and tended to defer to the thinking of those who may have had clearer minds.

Those people weren't elected president though. The buck stops with the president and I expect my president to be of sound mental faculties or to be removed from office.

 

[Hikergirl]

Those people weren't elected president though. The buck stops with the president and I expect my president to be of sound mental faculties or to be removed from office.

What about congress? I'm more concerned with the advanced age members who have no term limits.
The President isn't the only one making decisions for the rest of us.

 

[tcufrog]

What about congress? I'm more concerned with the advanced age members who have no term limits.
The President isn't the only one making decisions for the rest of us.

While that does concern me, there are hundreds of members of Congress so hopefully, the senile ones are balanced out by those of sound mind. There's only one President though and he has sole custody of the nuclear football.

 

[JaxDad]

What about congress? I'm more concerned with the advanced age members who have no term limits.
The President isn't the only one making decisions for the rest of us.

I’d actually start with the Supreme Court...

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

That all depends. Does he or she cover his or her plate at wedding receptions?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Age in & of itself would be a factor. Overall health would be another.

Every year, a greater percentage of 60-somethings die than 70-somethings. The theory behind that is that people with overall bad health (or bad genetics) simply don’t make it to their 70’s at all. Those who are healthy enough to survive their 60’s tend to go 80+.

We’ve had candidates in my voting life that have had what I would consider “questionable” health, at least as far as taking on a MAJOR political office such as President. It always weighs on my mind.

 

[goofyernmost]

Age in & of itself would be a factor. Overall health would be another.

Every year, a greater percentage of 60-somethings die than 70-somethings. The theory behind that is that people with overall bad health (or bad genetics) simply don’t make it to their 70’s at all. Those who are healthy enough to survive their 60’s tend to go 80+.

We’ve had candidates in my voting life that have had what I would consider “questionable” health, at least as far as taking on a MAJOR political office such as President. It always weighs on my mind.

The dangerous thing about that is that it is a very broad thought and really doesn't have any real connection to anything. Both of my parents made it to 70, but only one made it out. My Father died at 74 of a massive heart attack and my Mother died at 87 of Pulmonary Fibrosis. I turned 70 last July so it is a crap shoot. Both were healthy when they turned 70.

As far as Presidents are concerned that is why, no matter what the age it is vitally important that we pay close attention to Vice President selections. It's as important as the President.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

The dangerous thing about that is that it is a very broad thought and really doesn't have any real connection to anything. Both of my parents made it to 70, but only one made it out. My Father died at 74 of a massive heart attack and my Mother died at 87 of Pulmonary Fibrosis. I turned 70 last July so it is a crap shoot. Both were healthy when they turned 70.

As far as Presidents are concerned that is why, no matter what the age it is vitally important that we pay close attention to Vice President selections. It's as important as the President.

There’s nothing “dangerous” about it, it’s just a simple, interesting fact that it works out that way. I’m not using it as a rule for life while pointing out the fact that “on average” healthy people are more likely to see their 80’s than unhealthy people are to see their 70’s.

And yes, while it’s a crap shoot, people with obvious health issues aren’t just more likely to die, they’re more likely to have trouble doing the job even they don’t die.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I think about the people that age in my family. They are educated and wise, but still cannot connect with younger adults and the modern world. I think elected officials need to be able to speak/connect/understand the total population, not just the 70-plus crowd.

Older adults have the advantage of experience. We were young before. Younger people don't have this advantage.

 

[BLAZEY]

Most people have exceeded their sharpest and most productive years by age 80. I would not vote for an elderly national leader, nor would I choose treatment by an 80 year old surgeon, want to book a flight flown by an 80 year old pilot, have my taxes done by an 80 year old accountant or hire an 80 year old painter to paint my house. If that makes me an ageist, so be it.

I would want an official in office to be given whatever tests and means are available to see the he or she is physically and mentally fit for the job. Someone showing signs of dementia or in poor health is not fit to hold office.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I would want an official in office to be given whatever tests and means are available to see the he or she is physically Then not by their personal physician with the candidate/electee dictating the medical report? and mentally ditto fit for the job. Someone showing signs of dementia or in poor health is not fit to hold office.

Reasonable suggestion IF everyone undergoes the identical testing with the same standards, expectations, and qualifications.

 

[Hrhpd]

I thought of this thread last night watching the news. I am back in my old town for some events and the news was interviewing the first tenured black teacher in the state of Colorado. She was 106 years old. And still sharp as a tack. Her body is starting to fail her, she skied till she was in her 70's and now she is glad she is still walking. But her mind was strong and she looked like she was in her 60's or early 70's. She would have been in great mental and physical health in her 70's and 80's, fit to hold a high office.

It all depends on the person. Everyone is different at 70 or 80 or even 90.

I do agree that a physical should be mandatory, but it would become partisan quickly and we still would never get the true results. The doctor who did the physical of the most recent president was bizarre and said the president was in the best shape, the best shape of any 70 year old ever. Sounded like someone else scripted the public announcement.

 

[mnrose]

I thought of this thread last night watching the news. I am back in my old town for some events and the news was interviewing the first tenured black teacher in the state of Colorado. She was 106 years old. And still sharp as a tack. Her body is starting to fail her, she skied till she was in her 70's and now she is glad she is still walking. But her mind was strong and she looked like she was in her 60's or early 70's. She would have been in great mental and physical health in her 70's and 80's, fit to hold a high office.

It all depends on the person. Everyone is different at 70 or 80 or even 90.

I do agree that a physical should be mandatory, but it would become partisan quickly and we still would never get the true results. The doctor who did the physical of the most recent president was bizarre and said the president was in the best shape, the best shape of any 70 year old ever. Sounded like someone else scripted the public announcement.

Which is why the physical I have in mind would be done by the SAME clinic/physician...rather than someone selected by the candidate. And, a set of uniform exams given that would be the same for all (blood pressure, blood tests, height, weight, etc). The more objective, the better.

 

[tvguy]

Those people weren't elected president though. The buck stops with the president and I expect my president to be of sound mental faculties or to be removed from office.

Neither was Eleanor Roosevelt. But apparently she was running things right before FDR's death.
Interesting how public concern and media coverage has evolved over the years. CNN did a special 2 or 3 years ago interviewing former White House Correspondents about the differences. Used to be President's had a public life that was covered in the press, and a private life that was not covered because it was not considered to be related to the job of being President. If it had been Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter etc with Monica Lewinsky, it wouldn't have been reported.

 

[DLgal]

Yes, I feel very strongly that elderly people (I define this as anyone beyond retirement age) should NOT be qualified to be the President. There should be an upper age limit (IMO, no older than 60 at the time of inauguration).

Here are my reasons why I feel this way:

1. Declining mental capacity. This is just a biological fact. Sure, there are people who remain sharp well into their 80's and even 90's sometimes. However, this is highly unpredictable, and cognitive decline happens for most people beginning in their 60's. We need to have someone of sound mind running our country.

2. Motivation to better the country for the younger generations. Older people tend to lose touch with what the future holds, and tend to care less about the FAR future (the time period beyond which they will likely live). They tend to want to make decisions that will benefit THEM, RIGHT NOW (health care initiatives, taxes, social laws, etc). They also tend to look down on the types of social movements/developments happening in the younger generations and write them off as pointless or damaging ("kids these days" type dismissive mentality). We need politicians that make decisions in the interest of ALL their constituents, rather than pandering to only one demographic. Younger politicians seem to "get" this much better than older ones who are very set in their ways and belief systems.

3. Ability to be open minded to unconventional solutions to age old problems. Most older people simply do not want to hear new, innovative solutions to problems. They want to continue to say things like "in my day, we would fix this by..." It is very hard to let go of the past and realize that times change and new solutions need to be found. I feel that younger politicians are more open minded and willing to consider new solutions.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I do agree that a physical should be mandatory, but it would become partisan quickly and we still would never get the true results. The doctor who did the physical of the most recent president was bizarre and said the president was in the best shape, the best shape of any 70 year old ever. Sounded like someone else scripted the public announcement.

It was scripted. Earlier this year, Trump's personal physician, admitted that Trump wrote that report https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/01/politics/harold-bornstein-trump-letter/index.html

Yes, I feel very strongly that elderly people (I define this as anyone beyond retirement age) should NOT be qualified to be the President. There should be an upper age limit (IMO, no older than 60 at the time of inauguration).

You want to change the Constitution and discriminate based on age. Early onset dementia can occur in people as young as 30. https://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/guide/caregiver-early-onset-dementia

Retirement age is anywhere from 62 to 70, and it's not mandatory "you may start receiving benefits as early as age 62 or as late as age 70. "A person who will be 60 on Inauguration Day 2021 can't collect Social Security until they're 67 https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/agereduction.html

2. Motivation to better the country for the younger generations. Older people tend to lose touch with what the future holds, and tend to care less about the FAR future (the time period beyond which they will likely live).

You are making unfounded generalizations.

3. Ability to be open minded to unconventional solutions to age old problems. Most older people simply do not want to hear new, innovative solutions to problems.

Here, too.

 

[DLgal]

It was scripted. Earlier this year, Trump's personal physician, admitted that Trump wrote that report https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/01/politics/harold-bornstein-trump-letter/index.html

You want to change the Constitution and discriminate based on age. Early onset dementia can occur in people as young as 30. https://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/guide/caregiver-early-onset-dementia

Retirement age is anywhere from 62 to 70, and it's not mandatory "you may start receiving benefits as early as age 62 or as late as age 70. "A person who will be 60 on Inauguration Day 2021 can't collect Social Security until they're 67 https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/agereduction.html

You are making unfounded generalizations.

Here, too.

This is my OPINION. Yeah, I am making generalizations. Obviously. And yes, I am fully okay with age discrimination for the highest office in the land. There is a lower age requirement, so this office is ALREADY discriminating based on age. Why can't a 34 year old be President but a 35 year old can? It's completely arbitrary. And what does Social Security have to do with anything? I think most people consider 65 to be "retirement age," regardless of Social Security. The fact is, most people with full time jobs stop working by that age.