(May 16, 2014 at 8:05 am)A Theist Wrote:(May 15, 2014 at 6:53 pm)Isun Wrote: The difference here, is that there was a reason to be concerned with Reagan's health. There wasn't and isn't one for Clinton's health.
You don't know that. If Hillary decides to run for president in 2016 she'll be the same age as Ronald Reagan when he ran for president in 1979 (both at 69). Hillary will be 73 years old at the end of serving a first term if elected. Unlike Hillary who suffered a head injury there was no health issues to speak of with Ronald Reagan when he ran for office for his first term as president. If there was reason to question Reagan's health at that time there's certainly reason to suspect Hillary's health and fitness for 2016.
It isn't always about age, it is about evidence. Something that republicans ignore and deny.
There was clear evidence that there was a problem with Reagan. There is no doubt there was a problem with John McCains judgement.
But at this point in time, there is no reason to think that Clinton's judgement is anything but solid. Now if in the next two years, she shows poor judgement or senility...then we can discuss it.
