Playing the age card against McCain
As Michael Barone points out, the Republican race is coalescing around candidate McCain after an early period of chaos, while the Democratic race is still up for grabs after an early period of seeming clarity.
Nevertheless, McCain remains a polarizing figure for Republicans. Not conservative enough on immigration, taxes, global warming, you name it.
But consider the Democratic alternatives. As McCain’s mother said recently, Republicans should “hold their noses” and vote for him anyway.
If McCain becomes the nominee—which I predict will happen—it might become a very important thing that McCain’s mother is around to say anything. That’s because I also predict that, whoever the Democratic candidate will be, one campaign focus is almost certain to be McCain’s advanced age.
This will be an especially invidious comparison if Obama is the Democratic nominee. Imagine the contrast between the two. It’s not just that McCain will have reached the ripe maturity of seventy-two years (hey, it doesn’t sound all that old to me) by election day, it’s that he looks even older than that by dint of his skin problems and the sequelae of multiple injuries from the days of his Vietnam captivity, lending him the stiffness of a much older person.
The age card is already starting to be played, albeit rather gently for now; witness this Newsweek piece by Anna Quindlen:
He takes stairs slowly and cannot lift his arms to comb his hair…Political operatives say that his age makes McCain’s choice of a running mate particularly critical. But if you enter the process stressing a hedge against mortality or incapacity, shouldn’t that suggest something about suitability for the job in the first place? The senator’s pursuit of the presidency reminds me a bit of those women who decide to have a baby in their late 50s. The impulse is understandable, the goal possible. But, looking at all the facts, and the actuarial tables, is it really sensible?
It’s not that I think some concern about McCain’s age is unjustified. Age is an issue, and all else being equal, I wish he were fifteen years younger (all else being equal, I wish I were fifteen years younger. But I digress.)
But I don’t vote based on actuarial tables. They are only predictive with large numbers of people. That’s why insurance companies use them; they’re in the business of dealing with the many, not the one.
Quindlen points out that the last President to die in office of natural causes was FDR. She neglects to point out that he was a highly effective President for twelve years in a wheelchair, a disability that was hushed up by the press of the time. He is widely considered to have been one of our greatest Presidents, but if Americans had known the extent of his pre-existing health problems back in 1932, it’s a good possibility they would not have elected him—as he probably knew at the time, since he took great pains to cover them up and to make it appear that he could walk on his own.
Quindlen also fails to point out that when FDR died he was sixty-three, hardly geriatric.
Or that Kennedy, our youngest President ever, was felled by an assassin at age of forty-six; youth does not protect a person from fate, or bullets.
Then there’s Bill Clinton. Youthful and vigorous, a runner, he was elected at the tender age of forty-six. And yet in August of 2004, only a few years after leaving office, he underwent a quadruple bypass.
Lyndon Johnson was older than JFK, to be sure, but he was only fifty-six when elected in 1964. He died of heart disease at the age of sixty-four, only a few years after he ended his Presidency. It was never emphasized during the ’64 campaign, as best I can remember, but Johnson had a strong history of prior heart disease. His Wikipedia entry mentions that his final fatal heart attack was the third in his lifetime. A Google search reveals that he had suffered a massive coronary in 1955, while Majority Leader.
As for the first heart attack, although my internet research failed to turn up any details, I seem to recall reading a biography of LBJ that mentioned his having had a serious coronary while in his late thirties. He was probably a walking recipe for a heart attack (and perhaps death) in office. And yet that didn’t happen, nor was it ever much of an issue.
For a modern-day counterpart, look no further than Dick Cheney—that is, if you can bear to read his incredibly bleak and lengthy cardiac history. When Bush chose Cheney as a running mate in 2000, he was widely criticized even by those who liked Cheney’s politics. Bush himself was young, hale, and hearty, but he chose a Vice President who seemed to be on his last legs (first heart attack at thirty-seven, and many similar events along the way).
I was convinced that Cheney would never survive Bush’s first term, even if it was a calm one; the strain of the office alone was bound to kill him. And yet here he is, seemingly functional, despite an incredibly stressful two terms, and the wishes of many that he would die.
McCain’s most serious health problem has been two bouts of melanoma, a type of cancer that is often fatal but is highly curable when caught early. You can be absolutely certain that, if elected, McCain will be monitored so closely for signs of melanoma that the smallest sign will be nipped in the proverbial bud.
The bottom line? It’s impossible to predict a person’s fate based on age—up to a point, that is; one oughtn’t to elect a ninety-year old. If you really want to look at actuarial tables, you’ll see that the life expectancy for a 72-year old man nowadays is 11.75 years. And so it’s a good bet—although hardly a sure thing—that McCain would be around to finish at least a first term, and perhaps even a second.
So here’s a nomination for McCain’s campaign theme song:
Well it’s all right
Even if you’re old and gray
Well it’s all right
You still got something to say
Well it’s all right
Remember live and let live
Well it’s all right
The best you can do is forgive
Well it’s all right
Riding around on the breeze
Well it’s all right
If you live the life you please
Well it’s all right
Even if the sun don’t shine
Well it’s all right
We’re going to the end of the line
I dont like the color or styles of ties he wears. Thats enough for me.
He’ll be better than these flaming theist — Huckabee and Romney.
I dont know that Romney is a theist. He certainly does appear to be a better conservative.
The age issue seems to be a peculiar American invention and defies the time in which we live (people live longer) and the world at large (age is good and means experience and wisdom). One can think of Franklin, Andy Jackson who seems to have always been old, Churchill, DeGaul, Conrad Adenauer of Germany, Nelson Mandela, David Ben Gurion, Neru, Indira Ghandi, even Krushchev as older and wiser and respected for their experience. America seems confined too much to youthful callowness and fresh rather than lined faces.
If only “Fast Willy” had the more maturity of age, perhaps he would have avoided the Monica “problem.” But then he would already have had the Flowers or Jones problem, or the other trouser issues that seems to have confronted him constantly.
I suspect that I prefer a President with maturity and a “settled” libido, along with a fierce determination to follow long held convictions. I prefer a healthy argument over real issues and not inexperience and superficiality. So I suspect I will take “Old” John McCain, who in an interview observed about himself that, ” I am as old as dirt and have more scars than Frankenstein, but I do what I belive is right for America.”
I’m three years older than McCain and I am amazed at the energy he has. The Presidency need not be a job that requires robust physical health (ala Roosevelt) but it certainly requires a sharp mind and the ability to delegate wisely. It also requires the resolve to be able to make the decision to send young men and women into harm’s way. I hope McCain has those qualities. I don’t think he’s particularly demonstrated them during the debates.
As a libertarian leaning conservative, I have many differences with McCain. Because of that I am literally amazed at the votes he is getting in the primaries. I guess it shows that we conservatives are not as numerous as we thought. I see so many conservatives who, like Limbaugh and Coulter, would not vote for him. Obviously someone is voting for him, unless, conspiracy alert, the primaries are rigged. (LOL) There are apparently a lot of moderate or middle of the road Republicans who seem to think he’s great.
Well, if he’s the choice I will certainly support him over Obama or Clinton’s Mama.
Perhaps it’s a sign of my age, but I see the age of McCain compared to Obama as an advantage. Of course, I think Democrats are essentially adolescents anyway, with appearance merely emphasizing that.
We need McCain as the nominee. Events on the groound are picking back up in Iraq.
Already, however, radical antiwar types are celebrating the carnage, proclaiming today’s violence as proof that the surge not only failed, but that the shift in U.S. strategy under General David Petraeus was a scam, an “unscrupulous” bait-and-switch promotion full of “artificial manipulations” and “relative metrics” designed to hoodwink American public opinion.
See, “Security in Iraq: Will Surge Gains Hold?”
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/security-in-iraq-will-surge-gains-hold.html
Yeah, I knew liberals would celebrate the deaths of 70 human beings because of how they would be able to use that as a reason for why we should abandon the rest of the population to that fate. Because shoving democracy down a liberals throat is worse for them than the idea of using mentally retarded women as remote controlled bombs. This is why real leadership in the White House is so important. I mean real leadership.
If McCain is all we have left and Obama is the Democrat front runner, you will see me at the polls marking my ballot for McCain. However, if its a contest between Hillary and McCain, I dont know that there’s enough of a difference between the two to tear me away from a beer commercial.
JimmyJ is right. Where do I sign up for AltaKockers for McCain? Not that Romney is evil, despite being from Michigan, but I can’t see how our pudits can get so whoopsed-up about Mac’s transgressions. I mean, for God’s sake, Mitt was governor of freakin’ Mass! What about all his left-leaning leadership there?
Those threatening to head for the hills and wait for the mothership need to live in a blue state or area and enjoy our crime and taxes and third-worldie folderol. Then go to vote and see their dream come true, no other candidate to vote for but left wing Dems.
McCain’s melanoma history, based on my search, is that he had a 1st melanoma removed from “a” shoulder (side not specified) in 1993. Melanomas 2 and 3 were simultaneously excised from skin of left temple and left arm August 2000, with “widely clear” margins. The left temple must’ve been of more concern to the Mayo docs, since he had lymphoscintigraphy-guided lymph node sampling for that one—node(s) were negative. Thus the post-surgical distortion of his left lower face.
But depth of invasion of the 2000 melanomas was not stated in anything I found, and that is critical data: as depth of skin invasion doubles, from 0.4 millimeters to 0.8, survival is halved, from ~80% to ~40%.
Melanomas are notorious for late (>5 yr interval) recurrences.
Well Cappy, what I’m asking for the mothership to beam down, is a Republican candidate that isnt offering amnesty to illegal aliens, threatening to close down Gitmo, extend civil rights to Achmed the bomb-maker and pretend global warming is real and taxing me for it the best way to solve it. I feel a conservative mother ship ought to produce conservative candidates, and right now Romney appears to be that guy, and not Juan McCain, “the Maverick” who quite frankly in my opinion is too old, wears bad ties and has only been somewhat conservative sounding only very recently.
If this is all the mothership is going to send me, it needn’t have bothered making the trip.
Oh, and BTW, I live in Oregon.
I’m surprised that more neo-cons aren’t actively pushing for Romney. Romney’s main problem seems to be that he’s too neat or plastic or somesuch. Yet, in this very curious election time, with all the flawed candidates, Romney seems to be fairly well suited to the job of President. McCain strikes me as a cranky loose cannon, Obama is an empty suit, and Clinton is a replay of Clintoniansim, whatever that is.
I’d love to get some feedback from commenters on this site about why Romney is or isn’t the best candidate. Thank you, thoughtful commenters.
Regarding the age issue–I’ve noticed that people age at quite different rates and that outward appearance doesn’t really reflect stamina or mental acuity. I could give many examples from my own family and friends, and I’m sure you could all do the same. For me, age is–in itself–not an issue.
I worked with melanoma patients in a laboratory devoted to curing this form of cancer and studied literature on the subject. While it certainly most aggressive among solid tumors, it also most easily diagnosted and operated, and if still limited to skin, has very good chances for complete cure. I also seen several cases of spontaneous remission long enough to consider them full recovery.
McCain’s age doesn’t really bother me. However, I’m in my mid-50s and I have trouble thinking as quickly as I once did. It must be harder even when you’re a good 71.
In this week’s Republican debate, McCain seemed to lose his train of thought at least once, maybe twice. He recovered somewhat, but only by repeating the same response he began the discussion with. I was watching not all that attentively, but I did notice that slightly blank look on his face and it actually surprised me.
If he is having trouble physically, that’s another problem. Its true Roosevelt was in a wheelchair and Kennedy had debilitating back problems. But the media didn’t generally show those physical weaknesses to the public with either presidents.
MSM is not going to shield a president’s obvious physical ailment from the public these days, particularly a Republican president, even though right now they’re all thumbs up for McCain.
An American president must appear strong and capable to the world stage. If McCain needs help entering a limo or climbing stairs to a helicopter, the impression is of feebleness.
If the Newsweek report that McCain has problems walking or climbing stairs is true, when will we see it in the media?
After the Republican party nomination, most likely.
“I will not make an issue of my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” —Ronald Reagan
Personally I was expected McCain will get good position running to the election and here he is no longer dead horse,
The age issue for some may like to play this issue but all in all shouldn’t be an issue neoneo right when she brought Dick Cheney as an example with all his health problem he still in the office carry his responsibilities despite frequent check in/out of hospitals.
Ahead for McCain or the other side winner a hard time from economy crises and unemployment all these big issues need energy and wise sharp sited man. Who will be fits these?
But what interesting about McCain with his politic life he is a savvier, from POW in vitamin, now his son serving with US trop in Iraq these an added values to him.
The other interesting thing about him in 2001 when McCain nearly abandoned GOP! May be this why those moderate democrats encouraged voting for him.
But in the end there is one factor will stand to the race for presidency this is Israeli factor
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2008/feb/01/clinton_obama_the_anti_israel_factor
So what is a candidate to say, particularly about the Arab-Israeli conflict?
I’ve written this before. A candidate should say: “If I am elected President, I will do everything in my power to bring about negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians with the goal of achieving peace and security for Israel and a secure state for the Palestinians. As a supporter of Israel, I believe that Israel’s surest route to security is by reaching an agreement with the Palestinians. Furthermore, I believe that achieving an equitable Israeli-Palestinian agreement will advance America’s interests throughout the Middle East and the Muslim world. Peace between Israel and the Arabs will only be achieved by means of US leadership and I intend to provide it.”
That should be the basic message just as it should be our basic policy.
By M.J. Rosenberg
M.J. Rosenberg is the Director of Policy Analysis for Israel Policy Forum (IPF), a position he has held since the spring of 1998.
http://www.ipforum.org/display.cfm?rid=1384
We have seen recently that every action of US diplomacy to revive so-called “peace process” in Israel-Palestinian conflict have produced only negative results – escalation of Palestinian terror. It is time to understand that this horse is dead, no sense to beat it. Only unambiguos defence of Israel right to defence herself, without any reservations and conditions, can reign in terrorists. The real goal is produce desperation among them, to kill any hope that their cause can succeed.
As all polls show, in 2009 there will be a new premier-minister in Israel, and his name is Netanyahu. So next US president should explain how he/she will cooperate with Likud government, not with Kadima government.
I thought that the Quindlen piece was inexcusable. It will get worse. Think of the stamina it would take just to travel the country again and again to campaign in person. Running for president is not for the infirm.
Still I don’t know if I totally buy your comparisons to FDR and LBJ. 64 may not be old by our standards, but I hardly think that in 1945 a 64 year old could expect to live twenty more years either. My grandfather died a few years after LBJ at the age of 64 or 65 of a heart attack. Had he lived 20 years later even, the level of care he would have received likely would have kept him alive longer as any doctor would have made him change his lifestyle.
For their times FDR and LBJ were old. It’s just that the media respected the President’s privacy somewhat. Now we know a lot more, perhaps even too much, about our candidates.
I may post this again if a good opportunity occurs …
The Republican purists are talking about the need for a disaster–a Democratic administration–to transform the Republican party. They are seemingly oblivious to the opportunity created as the Democrats flay themselves in the primary.
Right now, previously lukewarm AND loyal Democrats are questioning their own party as an apparently good-hearted candidate running a clean and uplifting campaign is smeared again and again by the very champions that most of that party supported enthusiastically in the past. They are hurting themselves before being elected; it will make no sense at all to give them the election. People who are grateful they could vote for an Obama will be slow to question him; people who accepted the necessity to vote for Hillary will be even slower to question her. Why let it get that far?
Use the opportunities your opponent gives you, not the ones you hope he might.
I think this site is doomed because Neoneocon is making way too much sense. I hope that Republican and other voters get a grip because the either Democrat would be a disaster for the country.