Turning 80 years old as President

[bluewater]

When will a candidate turn 80 during their term if elected President in 2020 ?

Sanders: 8 months into his first term

Biden: 1 year and 10 months into his first term

Warren: never

Harris: never

Buttigieg: never

O'Rourke: never

But age is just a number. Is it an important number?

We never had an 80 year old serving as President, is it time to change that?

[Kind of Blue]

1. Oooh, you're gonna get it.

[Cha]

2. Ageist. I don't give a shite..as long

as whomever beats trump and does a good job as POTUS.

[bluewater]

4. Point out anything Ageist in the OP

[emmaverybo]

5. Whole post is ageist. Its reason for being rests on ageism. NT

[highplainsdem]

8. Yep.

[Cha]

9. Thank You, emmaverybo.. I was

just going to ignore him because it was obvious.

[Vegas Roller]

16. +1000 n/t

[tymorial]

69. Age should be a factor.

I believe Biden is currently capable but whether that will remain is the question.

Our country is a mess. If this was 2016 I wouldn't have a problem but this isn't 2016. We need stability and an octogenarian presents more risk than someone who is younger. That isn't ageism that is reality

[The Mouth]

98. Depends on the Veep

and based on the assumption they run for a second term.

Biden with Warren veep, or Pete...
Wins
Bows out 2024, or has some legitimate medical reason to bow out, making the Veep now the incumbent.

[justhanginon]

23. Subtle nope. Ageist yep. You're not even trying anymore.

[Cha]

29. Thank you!

[treestar]

74. LOL why did you post it then?

You obviously are making the point that turning 80 in office is a bad thing.

[UniteFightBack]

101. I'm taking it as you think it's high time we had an 80 year old president. That's how I'm taking it

whether you meant it that way or not.

[SouthernProgressive]

118. OK.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287200375

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=352745

[tymorial]

68. Ageism. Are you really going with that argument?

Are we going to pretend that octogenarians do not experience adverse health conditions and debilitating health conditions in excess of a younger population? Are we going to pretend that men and women who have advanced beyond the median lifespan are more likely to die then the rest of the population?

This country needs long-term stability to repair the damage caused by Trump.

Now if Biden or Sanders managed to win the nomination and I will vote for them of course. And then I will hope and pray that they stay healthy. Sickness and death can happen to anyone but you know... my uncle was 78 and he was given a full bill of health by his doctors. 10 months later he had a stroke and that was it.

We cannot afford the scenario and I apologize if that offends Biden supporters but it's the reality of age.

[Cha]

70. Yeah, agesim.. I don't give a shite how old

they are or what gender.. as long as they have the experience and can beat the Psycho in the electoral college.

[tymorial]

96. We have more to worry about than election day eom

[redstateblues]

81. Jimmy Carter would still be a good President

[Joe941]

120. This.

[highplainsdem]

3. I suppose you could ask all the people who've told pollsters Biden or Sanders would be their choice

as the candidate or the next president.

The opinion of voters who wouldn't vote for them because of their age really doesn't matter one damn bit, as long as enough voters support them.

[Cha]

7. Yeah, I wonder if all those who

say they're voting for Biden or BS are concerned about their age like the OP?

[oasis]

10. The 14th Dalai Lama is damn near 80. He needs to go.

[bluewater]

12. The Dalai Lama?

[oasis]

14. Yup, at 80, he'll soon be beyond his ability to think clearly. nt

[DesertRat]

58. Considering the Dalai Lama's recent comments on women and immigrants

he's not the best example.

[treestar]

75. RBG is over 80

Dianne Feinstein is too.

[bluewater]

77. Is RGB or Diane Feinstein up to the rigors of being President in 2020?

[treestar]

82. Yes. The Dotard must go.

A Supreme Court Justice needs more brain neurons firing than the President does. Writing those opinions is very complex, much more so than speeches. And every decision is supported by a ton of help. I wonder just how hard POTUS is. You never have to drive, plan trips or deal in any little details. Anything you need to know, there is an army of staffers to go and research the details for you.

The Moron screws up because he won't take advantage of all that.

[oasis]

99. Do you realize how gigantic a White House staff is?

They do most of the real work.

And by the way, many of them would be in their thirties and forties.

[peggysue2]

11. Excuse me but . . .

Warren is hardly a spring chicken. LOL. If we're going to take the ageist route, then it applies to everyone pushing the 'senior twilight.'

Give me a break.

[bluewater]

13. Warren will be 79 years and 6 months old at the end of her second term.

I checked on her.

She won't be 80 as president, let alone in the first half of her first term.

[peggysue2]

15. Sorry, but the argument fails

If you're going to bring up age you can't sell Elizabeth Warren as a young'un. Just doesn't work with the reality. Unless you think the age of 80 is an automatic death/dementia switch. Which means Liz would have only 6 months of productive life after leaving office, 2nd term.

There are good pro/con arguments out there for all our candidates. This ain't one of them!

[bluewater]

24. Pardon?

What argument? The OP just presents information on when the candidates would turn 80 years old if elected in 2020.

If you wish to make an argument that Warren, at age 70, is in the same age bracket as Sanders, who is 77, or Biden, who is 76, feel free.

[peggysue2]

32. Thank you for that

I will and I do.

You are supporting Elizabeth Warren, six to seven years the junior of Biden and Sanders respectively. Yet you're making a point about the candidates' age and/or posing the question about an eighty-year old threshold.

The point/argument/whatever doesn't wash considering the age of your own candidate preference. Hello?

I wouldn't discount Elizabeth Warren for her age, anymore than Biden or Sanders. Their age is relative to their own individual health, stamina and intellectual capacity. And right now none of the three have demonstrated any problems. Could that change? Of course it could. But neither you nor I have access to a crystal ball. Btw, health problems can also befall our younger candidates.

I'd also add this has a distinct deja vu smell to it. Hillary Clinton was pilloried for nonexistent health 'concerns.' And now we have a mental case squatting in the White House.

[bluewater]

35. Thanks for the thoughtful expression of your views.

I am not expressing my personal views in the OP or this thread for obvious reasons.

Thanks again for elevating the level of the responses.

[LanternWaste]

115. What is the precise, objective and relevant difference between 80 years of age and 72?

(think really, really hard on this one....)

[bluewater]

117. 8 years?

Do you think there is no difference between 72 years of age and 80 years of age?

Is there a difference between 72 years of age and 90 years of age?

Is there a difference between 72 years of age and 100 year of age?

After all, age is just a number.

There is a difference between 72 years of age and 123 years of age though.

No one has lived to be 123 years old.

Oldest person ever:
The greatest fully authenticated age to which any human has ever lived is 122 years 164 days by Jeanne Louise Calment (France). Born on 21 February 1875 to Nicolas (1837 - 1931) and Marguerite (neé Gilles 1838 - 1924), Jeanne died at a nursing home in Arles, southern France on 4 August 1997.
https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/oldest-person

[Skya Rhen]

17. These types of posts look eerily familiar. It's like deja vu. It reminds me of - no - can't be...

Can it?

[peggysue2]

22. You noticed that, too?

[Cha]

27. Ya think!

[Autumn]

53. That happens often when a new person signs up. The same probably happened when you signed up 3

months ago. It will get better.

[BannonsLiver]

111. uawchild?

That’s the vibe I get.

[CatMor]

18. We have never had a total moron as president .

but we do now. I'll take an intelligent experienced 80 year old over the current moron in the WH if they can win.

[Cha]

26. Well said, CatMor.

[treestar]

76. That's a good point

[Thomas Hurt]

19. Age doesn't matter, whether they are mentally stable and othewise health is.

Those issues can apply to a candidate of any qualified age.

[Vegas Roller]

20. 80 is an arbitrary number and signifies nothing

The choice of 80 was singularly driven by a desire to bash Biden (and Sanders who has no chance of winning anyway.)

[loyalsister]

52. Is 35 also arbitrary?

I think not. I don't think it would be a great idea to elect a 15 or even 20yr old president because physical and social development are still in progress. Similarly, natural bodily decline is well under way long before a person hits 80.
For that reason, I think we had an absurd field of candidates in 2016 and now. I would rather vote for a younger candidate, but thus far Elizabeth Warren is making the argument that most appeals to me.

[Vegas Roller]

72. I think age is arbitrary

Some 80 year olds run marathons that 25 years olds cannot.

Some 80 year olds can solve complex mathematical problems faster than others any age.


Attacking Biden on age is manifestly disingenuous because it doesn't take into account all the experience accumulated over the years in various offices he has held.

[loyalsister]

106. It's not an attack

It is a fact that our bodies and minds deteriorate with age. The chance of developing various impairments is 100 percent. The variety of types of impairments increases with age. Not all impairments are disabling but many make daily life activities difficult. There's a good reason why people retire, take on fewer responsibilities and plan their funerals in later years. They have the consideration to avoid conditions where their sudden absence or limits on their abilities creates a burden.

Age is far from arbitrary. There is a good reason why 10 yes olds are not driving cars or walking around with credit cards.

[pnwmom]

21. There are differences in the aging brain that are real, so being aware of them isn't "ageist.'

This study looked at the brains and cognitive functioning of people age 80 and older.

https://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/news/20110810/study-alzheimers-harder-to-spot-over-80#2

In the older participants, there was less difference in memory and other measures of cognitive function between people with a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s and people in the same age group without a diagnosis than in the younger age group.

The older Alzheimer’s patients also showed less severe thinning of portions of the cerebral cortex and the overall cerebrum than the younger patients when compared to healthy peers.

Bondi says this is not surprising because decreases in the thickness of these areas of the brain have been found to occur with normal aging.

The study appears online today in the journal Neurology.

[emmaverybo]

28. You had that one ready to go. Try this:

The Potential of the Aging Mind
Combating commonly held beliefs about the aging brain

A persistent myth in our youth-focused culture suggests the process of aging means inevitable, progressive decline. In my field of research, brain health, this myth results in most people believing and allowing their best brain years to be in the past.

Think about it. When do you believe your brain was operating at peak performance?

I frequently ask people this question, and the answer is almost always 10 to 20 years ago - no matter what age they are!

While it is true that many brain processes decline as we age, that is only part of the story. As brain health experts, we are discovering there is more to be celebrated than to be feared. Some brain functions actually improve as we grow older. In fact, as long as no disease is present, the majority of seniors continue to have the capacity to continue to learn new things and make sound decisions.


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/make-your-brain-smarter/201508/the-potential-the-aging-mind

[pnwmom]

41. This person referenced a study she did on people in their 50's, 60's, and 70's.

The OP, and the Neurology article my link sites, address the age group of 80 and above.

Our research, "Healthy Brain, Health Decisions: The MetLife Study of Decision-Making Potential," examined healthy adults in their 50s, 60s and 70s. Encouragingly, we found no decline in decision-making ability in any age group. We also found strategic learning capacity--the ability to sift and know which information is more important to focus on and ignore less important information--may actually increase with age.

[bluewater]

45. Thanks for elevating the discussion.

[emmaverybo]

49. The point is that healthy brains may process information somewhat more slowly with aging, but that

the mind has a reservoir of knowledge and experience to draw upon, so that slower processing is well compensated for by sounder decision making. This we traditionally have called “wisdom.”

It has also been shown that older people tend to scan a problem, looking at the big picture rather than getting bogged down details as do their younger counterparts.

Intellectually, aging people can not only retain knowledge, but continue to grow.

This fact is well attested to by the numbers of artists and writers who have produced some of their
best work past 65. Diana Athil, a British writer, won the prestigious Costa award at 90.

Having read Biden’s recent writing on the geo-political situation in Central America and our history of failed policies there, which contributes to migrants fleeing their countries, I’d say he is in fine
shape cognitively.

My personal experience with seniors in my community, where people are highly educated, and continue to learn,teach, travel shows me that barring brain disease, aging minds can function
at a high capacity.

[treestar]

78. Exactly and the younger people on staff can deal with the details

We need Biden's wisdom to fix the foreign relations problems that the Moron has caused. None of the other candidates have that kind of experience and knowledge.

[emmaverybo]

91. +1

[rzemanfl]

103. I am plus one sock. I hate it when that happens.

I will retrace my steps and BBL.

[DBoon]

25. We've never had a punk rocker as a president either

It is Beto's time

[bluewater]

30. Foss!

Beto is a breath of fresh air. He could turn Texas blue if he's on the ticket in 2020.

[DBoon]

33. What would you expect from someone with the handle "DBoon"?

[Haggis for Breakfast]

47. We've never had a president who spoke EIGHT languages either.

Mayor Pete is a polyglot. He speaks EIGHT different languages: English, Spanish, Norwegian, Italian, French, Maltese, Dari (Farsi), and Arabic.

How impressive would it be to see a US president speak to (and understand, without the aid of an interpreter) the Iranians or the Saudis when they gather in a summit or conference ?

The current poser in the WH can barely navigate around English.

[bluewater]

50. Very impressive!

Buttigieg fund raising in the last quarter surpassed that of all other candidates.

So obviously people are noticing how impressive Pete is.

[IcyPeas]

57. Mayor Pete Buttigieg

is fantastic!

but some say he is too young. Is he?

List of Presidents by age at inauguration:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age

[YOHABLO]

31. Both Biden and Sanders seem to be in excellent health. Reagan deteriorated while Pres.

[aeromanKC]

34. We never had a Catholic or African American President either, well until we did

Looking forward to a competent 80 something, Woman, LBGT, Atheist, Muslim and other minorities to become until we did Presidents as well in our quest to form a more perfect Union.

[bluewater]

36. Good points.

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

[Otto Lidenbrock]

37. Jimmy Carter is 95 in October

And far more lucid than many people several decades younger.

He would have turned 80 a month before the 2004 Election. I'd rather he got a second term than the 22 years younger George W Bush!

[bluewater]

38. Do you think Carter at 95 is up to serving as President (hypothetically)?

You get the question though.

Is the current 95 year old version of Jimmy Carter up to the challenges of serving as President?

And just to be clear, Carter was 52 when taking office as President in 1977.

But having served a single term, you said you would have voted for him in 2004 over George W. Bush to serve a second term then. he would have been 80 years and 3 months old then.

Thanks for sharing that, it's an interesting point.

[Otto Lidenbrock]

42. see my edit

I think an 80 year old Carter in 2004 would have been up to the challenges. He has remained active in international matters as an ex-president (to the chagrin of some of his successors).

Medical science and fitness are a lot more prominent in our way of life since 2004 so I have no doubt Biden/Bernie physically and mentally will be sharp enough unless there is a sharp downturn (and these guys have access to top healthcare so any signs should have been flagged already).

[bluewater]

44. You made an interesting comparison of Carter's vs Bush's fitness to serve in 2004

Again, that was an intriguing point about Jimmy Carter's fitness.

Thanks for discussing it here.

[delisen]

46. Nelson Mandela president South Africa from age 75 to 80+

The presidency of Nelson Mandela began on 10 May 1994, when Nelson Mandela, an anti-apartheid activist, lawyer, and former political prisoner, was inaugurated as President of South Africa, and ended on 14 June 1999. He was the first non-white head of state in South African history, as well as the first to take office following the dismantling of the apartheid system and the introduction of multiracial democracy. Mandela was also the oldest head of state in South Africa's history, taking office at the age of seventy-five.[1]

The presidency is a 5 year term in South Africa and Mandela intended to serve one term. He was for many reasons the right person at the right time.

Conditions and needs of a country at a particular point in time may be a better predictor of a successful presidency than age or even health.

[treestar]

86. The right person at the right time.

That's the issue here. If we had not had the Dotard Disaster, Biden wouldn't be running, IMO. In fact at this point Hillary should be running for a second term. Biden, Hillary, Kerry, all old but they know foreign policy. Dotard had screwed it all majorly. None of the other 20 million Democrats has experience in that area.

[delisen]

93. I agree that lack of experience in foreign policy is a problem.

A president without that experience is going to have to delegate and choose carefully to whom and what they delegate-it will require a certain amount of wisdom.

[pnwmom]

107. The risk of Alzheimers doubles every five years from the age of 65.

There is a difference between 75 and 80. and between 80 and 85.

[left-of-center2012]

39. Imagine the outrage ...

Imagine the outrage were one to mention a woman's age.

[bluewater]

43. Some did mention a female candidate's age in this very thread.

There was no outrage, just polite discussion.

[left-of-center2012]

54. Good

I've seen many 'outrages' since I joined 7 years ago.

[Politicub]

40. If that's what primary voters choose, then I'm for it.

[Autumn]

48. I have to laugh. Last year all we heard was no more old white men for president.

That wasn't ageist in the least I guess. Funny how that changed.

[mopinko]

51. i dont think it is disqualifying but

i dont put it in the plus column, either.
i've kinda had enough of worrying about whether or not the guy w the codes is firing on all cylinders.

[Cha]

55. I wouldn't compare our candidates

to the freaking Psycho Squatting in the wh.

[mopinko]

60. i dont. but in my normal that we get back to,

i dont see a reason for that to even be on the table w such a deep field.

[Cha]

63. Yeah, you kinda were.

[mopinko]

65. kinda

if i had really compared them, you wouldnt have to wonder.

[Cha]

66. I'm not wondering.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

56. Both Sanders and Biden appear to be of sound mind....Trump on the otherhand.....

Does not.

[BlueStater]

59. I don't want an 80-year-old president either.

Or any presidents born in the 1940s for that matter as I feel they've had their time. Jesus fucking Christ.

[treestar]

85. Biden wouldn't be running if it weren't for this specific situation

We need somebody who knows enough to fix foreign and domestic policy. We just had an "outsider." He screwed everything up.

[Skittles]

112. agreed

it is ridiculous ......I cannot imagine an 80 year old doing MY job, let alone being president....ENOUGH already

[The Mouth]

61. No.

Physical and mental capacity is,

I had a neighbor, late 70's early 80s- sharp as a tack, nation's oldest working stockbroker. He commented to the then-teenage me

"I'm there (work) when these 50-year-old whippersnappers (yes, he said it) and there, and I'm there when they leave. And I made more money last year than any year before"

A few years later he was trying to convince me to stupidly invest in yet another company he had just found out about (by going back to the JC and taking computer courses at 83)-.that was going public soon - I figured that at 85 or whatever what the fuck could he know.

Shoulda bought the Microsoft.

[SidDithers]

62. No, it's not time to change it...nt

Sid

[DesertRat]

64. We've never had a woman serving as President. Maybe we should try that.

Again.

[treestar]

87. I don't want a woman just because it's our turn or we should try it

I want the first female president to win fair and square.

[Skittles]

113. the first woman already HAS won, if everything was "fair and square"

Last edited Mon Jul 15, 2019, 04:26 AM - Edit history (1)

[Cha]

67. I don't give a shite how old, or what gender..

I care about who has the best experience and will beat trump in the electoral college.

[Demit]

71. We had an elderly president who had Alzheimers by the age of 77. Age is a worry.

No matter the bleatings of the "that's ageism!" crowd, age is a consideration. How can it not be? The Presidency of the United States is a job with awesome stress and awesome responsibility with decision-making that affects the entire world. How can age with its vagaries not be a factor in deciding who's fit for it?

[Cha]

79. Just because Reagan had it doesn't mean

everyone past a certain age is going to get it.

That argument doesn't hold anything.

[treestar]

84. Yes, Reagan was an idiot anyway

Like Dubya, the Moron . . . Cha

[Demit]

90. Of course it doesn't. But that's what is meant by the phrase "vagaries of age."

The likelihood of some kind of impairment increases as we age. Especially the closer we get to, and then enter into, our 80s.

Age is a legitimate consideration.

[emmaverybo]

94. Early onset Alzheimers also exists. Although certainly there are age-related cognitive disorders,

health in general is a crap-shoot. The majority of seniors do not get Alzheimer’s or dementia.
Any younger candidate could get any number of diseases that would impair performance.

Three top candidates are considered elderly. Hopefully, if one is elected, he or she will pick a younger VP.

[Demit]

97. I don't think we need to focus only on dementia, in talking about age-related decline.

And for the younger candidates, age-related decline is an irrelevant concern. At any rate, we are only at the beginning of a long and rigorous campaign season. Lots to happen & to observe in the months ahead.

[treestar]

73. Surprising that you would post something to be negative

about a candidate, especially Biden.

Well, so? They will have all the perks of the office and the best health care. They have all their faculties. I don't care if DUers or their parents don't. People who have lived Biden's or Sanders' life keep active and don't lose their faculties.

[bluewater]

80. Why do you view pointing out when Biden turn's 80 as a negative comment about him?

He's going to turn 80 one year and ten months into his first term if elected.

Why is pointing out that obvious fact perceived as being negative about him?

[treestar]

83. Now you are being disingenuous

[bluewater]

88. Or perhaps I am not the one being Ageist?

Again, why is pointing out when Joe Biden will turn 80 during a possible first term in any way making a negative comment about him?

[treestar]

89. We already know that he will.

And you went on to compare the others who will not turn 80 in office.

I guess it's a good thing to turn 80 in office, and the comments on the others indicate they are inexperienced compared to Biden and Sanders. That is the point of the OP. Very good.

[no_hypocrisy]

92. I'd rather have Joe Biden or Bernie at 80 than Trump at 80.

[Mike Nelson]

95. I haven't seen anything...

… that would make me concerned about age-related health problems in the Democrats running... not so with the Republican!

[UniteFightBack]

100. Yes it would be groundbreaking! nt

[AlexSFCA]

102. an 80 y.o. can be healthier and have more energy

than younger folks.

[pnwmom]

114. True. But, as a group, they are statistically likely to be less healthy and

more likely to have declining cognitive function.

It's almost like no one remembers Ronald Reagan's decline.

[Skittles]

104. the Democratic party seriously need someone new

yes indeed

[guillaumeb]

105. Trump was an idiot at 30.

And Sarah Palin was an idiot at 30 as well.

[wyldwolf]

108. Ageism, and inviting more ageism.

Now, here's my imitation of you:

[dsc]

109. we haven't had a woman or a gay man serving as President, is it time to change that?

when we look at that statement we see bigotry well guess what your OP is bigotry as well. Neither Sanders nor Biden are my first choice but their age isn't my issue with either one. I think it is perfectly reasonable to have a discussion as to whether these particular candidates who will turn 80 in office are good or bad candidates. And part of that discussion would of necessity be health and age. Just like the young age of Buttigieg and O'Rourke would be subjects of discussion. Both Biden and Sanders seem to be healthy men who are up to the challenge of both campaigning and governing. Similarly both Buttigieg and O'Rourke seem to be prepared to govern. But to out and out refuse to consider someone simply because of age is, in fact, ageist.

[bluewater]

110. "we haven't had a woman or a gay man serving as President, is it time to change that?"

Yes, of course it is. There are many qualified women and gay individuals that would do an excellent job as President.

Harris , Warren, Buttigieg all would be very competent Presidents.

See how easy that was to answer?

People have given similar answers to the OP, stating they see no problem with a qualified 80 year old, in good health, being President.
I have thanked several of those people for participating in the discussion.

So, please point out where the OP is ageist.

Please be specific and point out where the OP "out and out refused to consider someone simply because of age."

[MarcA]

121. All Presidential Candidates should have a thorough medical exam

and the results made public. Same for members of Congress, Legislature
and Judicial. Same for background checks. Employers are allowed to do
this, and we are their Employers. After all, their job is to do a little thing
called making, interpreting and enforcing the law for all of us.

And your OP is Not "ageist".

[LanternWaste]

116. Wish I thought age was relevant in any measurable way to the office.

but I just can't seem to force that absurd pretense into my perspective.

Cognitive brain failure on the one extreme, eating Tide Pods on the other. The important thing though, is to focus on the one extreme over the other to better propel our own narratives.

[Renew Deal]

119. It's not just about the number, but the fact that some of these people haven't had real jobs in 50+

years.

Some of our more elderly candidates are not in touch with current america. They also will not live long enough to see the outcomes of their decisions.