Posted on 04/24/2014 11:49:34 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
The age comparisons between Hillary Clinton and Ronald Reagan seem as natural as they are nonsensical.
Yes, were Clinton to win in 2016, she would take office at age 69—just as Reagan did in 1981. And yes, the comparison is often made when Clinton's critics and allies debate whether she has the health to serve out two presidential terms.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
2. Reagan didn't suffer from Alzheimer's until after he left office.
And the most important. 3. Reagan LOVED America!
for a split second, I thought that was a photo of
Helen Thomas...
She’s old AND she’s mean...
She was mean long before she was old.
Lemon, 50 is the new 40 for men
and 50 is ans has always been 60 for women.
So this would make Hitlery 78.
At 69 Reagan was still chopping wood when he stayed at his ranch. When’s the last time Hillary did ANYTHING physically strenuous?
Her ideas come from 19th Century socialism, making her too old to hold office.
Hillary Clinton has a huge and growing weight problem. I suspect...if the Republicans hold the House and take the Senate, she will not run. When a woman reaches almost seventy years old...and is gaining weight very fast......something is not right!!! I have already predicted Ms. Clinton will not run for POTUS In 2016!!! Plus there is much more true dirt coming out about her Benghazi fiasco with braindead, America hater, POTUS Obama!!! Stay tuned!!!
Hillary’s Secret Service codename is Flying Buttress.
Maybe that's because the men who would get it at those ages died already as men have lower life expectancy than women do.
Unless your point is we'd be better with a male POTUS who died in office than a woman who went nuts.
Reagan DID STUFF.
Granny Hillary has not yet returned all the things that she and Billary stole from us, We The People, when they vacated the White House, including those mysteriously missing computer keyboard letter keys!
The author absolutely misuses these statistics. Life expectancy is valid and useful when talking about entire populations. When talking about an individual, patient history (as you rightly point out) completely overwhelms the value of group statistics.
The country survived Wilson’s stroke, Roosevelt’s moribund last term, and Reagan’s slow decline. But IMO we would be better off with a president’s sudden death than Alzheimer’s.
” When’s the last time Hillary did ANYTHING physically strenuous?”
Well, she HAS been known to stretch and twist the truth...
Reagan successfully ran CA for more then a decade and made it one of the worldest largest economies.
hillary... well...
I guess sticking with age comparisons is all they have
Definitely not a pretty picture, but then neither is Hillary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.