But then who is?
“Not getting any younger” doesn’t have the same meaning when talking about someone who is 52 as when discussing someone who is 67.
That’s a nice link.
Note that no one else has a high of a favorability rating as she does … but a few have as high or higher of an unfavorability rating.
No one is as known as Hillary. Most of her time since becoming a Senator and until becoming SOS has had her favorability within a few percent above and below 50. SOS put her above the partisan fray and now she is back to her baseline.
O’Malley? Right. Hardly anyone has any opinion about him.
The life expectancy for a white woman who is 67 is over 19 additional years.
Yes a 52 year old male can expect another 8 over that but statistically she is unlikely to die on the job.
That’s average life expectancy. By all accounts I’ve read, Hillary eats healthy, doesn’t smoke, and her weight is fine. Plus she is of course upper income. She’ll probably exceed average life expectancy by a healthy margin.
Bill, not so much. Male, history of bad eating and being overweight, has already had heart problems.
O’Malley is 52 and very fit from all I’ve read, FWIW.
Then again, the Presidency is also not a line of work conducive to good health and long life. And the question isn’t “how long is she likely to live”, but “how likely is she to die in the next 4 or 8 years”.
A good point and an interesting tool in this article to help answer it.
Short version: HRC totals 3 points on that index and O’Malley gets 2. (Males start off with 2 to start.) Both rate out with an above 95% chance of not dying during the next 8 years, his slightly higher.
But yeah, those are not people who serve as President, a job which somehow seems to accelerate the aging process dramatically!
I don’t really think it’s as bad as people make it out to be. The stress does seem to prematurely age Presidents, but they don’t die from it in the modern age(if they ever really did), and comfortable retirement seems to give them long life afterwards. Whatever damage they did to themselves with stress and overwork seems to heal pretty nicely in retirement.
Fellow Hart '84 staffers are coming to MJO’s aid: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-omalleys-longshot-candidacy-a-chance-to-reclaim-gary-harts-dream/2015/06/08/dd1cd29c-0492-11e5-a428-c984eb077d4e_story.html
Don’t stop there – tax their wealth, their assets.
Won’t get you much money. France is the most progressive in that regard and their rate is… 2%.
Plus any nation with a progressive tax system also ends up taxing the middle class more, because that’s where the money is in an advanced society. You simply cannot fund a European entitlement state on US middle class tax rates. And taxing the rich more than Europe does won’t cut it.
Please take your tax-policy discussion elsewhere; this is a thread about the O’Malley candidacy. Thanks.
O’Malley’s environmentalism and political opportunity: O'Malley Exploits Clinton and Sanders' Shared Weakness | The New Republic
A Chicago Tribune column yesterday on O’Malley’s retail politics in Iowa.
[spoiler]
Martin O’Malley: Obscure but not implausible
By Steve Chapman
The Chicago Tribune, July 22, 2015
CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA - In a party that produced such talented speakers as Mario Cuomo, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, this year’s presidential race looks like a slog through an oratorical desert. Yet last week, the Iowa Democratic Party hosted a dinner so masochists could hear five White House aspirants deliver speeches.
Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee and former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb read their remarks like dutiful students. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders brought to mind a punk band that knows only three chords and plays them all the same way: loud. Hillary Clinton uttered every sentence as though she were addressing third-graders. There was one respite, from Martin O’Malley. The former governor of Maryland apparently heard somewhere that fluent public speaking is a useful skill in politics.
If you couldn’t pick him out of a lineup, don’t feel bad. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll gives him 2 percent of Democratic voters. He was lampooned in an April Twitter post with a photo of the gyrocopter that landed on the White House lawn and the caption: “MARTIN O’MALLEY WILL NOT BE IGNORED.”
Clinton may have had the most supporters in the room, and Sanders’ populist fury stirred the most anticipation. But if there had been impartial judges giving scores, O’Malley would have been the clear winner — and a sound meter probably would have confirmed it. His lines about redeeming the American Dream and promoting a stronger middle class are standard fare. His selling point was: “I am the only candidate for president with 15 years of executive experience.” He stands out, he said, for turning “progressive values into action.”
This was where his earnest speech became impassioned, his voice rising over building cheers: “In Baltimore, we took action to save lives by reducing record-high violence to record lows. We increased drug treatment to free thousands of our courageous neighbors from the scourge of drug addiction. … Driver’s licenses for new American immigrants, marriage equality and a ban on assault weapons: and we didn’t just talk about it, we actually got it done!” On his mayoral record, O’Malley can point to documented changes that, in the post-Ferguson, Mo., era, seem incompatible. Overall crime fell more in Baltimore than in any other big city. At the same time, shootings by police dropped sharply.
But he is not above massaging the truth, as his comment on international trade revealed: “I am fundamentally opposed — as an American — to secret trade deals that our Congress is forced to vote on before we’re even allowed to read them.” In fact, the texts of the trade deals now being negotiated will be public months before Congress has to vote on them.
Stressing his executive record highlights a difference with his rivals. For all her years in public life, Clinton has trouble with the question: What have you actually accomplished? Sanders is the quintessential maverick, better at indicting the system than transforming it. O’Malley, 52, has other things going for him. With his athletic frame and thick gray hair, he looks like he walked out of a Cialis commercial. In 2013, The Washington Monthly called him “the best manager in government today.”
And he seems to enjoy the part of the campaign that involves chatting and posing for selfies with voters. At the nearby White Star Ale House, before the dinner, I arrived 10 minutes early for his “meet-and-greet,” only to find O’Malley already working a crowd whose numbers would have alarmed the fire marshal. He was still at it when I left an hour later.
Does any of this matter in a race against two far more famous candidates? Maybe not. He lacks Clinton’s money and incomparable name recognition, and he lacks Sanders’ visceral appeal to the Occupy Wall Street crowd. His narrow path to victory lies in convincing Democrats he’s a fresh alternative to the recycled Clinton, but unlike Sanders can be elected.
If nominated, O’Malley would offer plenty of targets for Republicans, who would portray him as a coal-hating, gun-grabbing abortion rights zealot who has embraced unauthorized immigrants and raised taxes over and over. Rebutting that portrayal is a problem he would love to have. If old-fashioned retail campaigning still works in Iowa — and Rick Santorum’s Republican victory four years ago suggests it does — his candidacy is more plausible than may be apparent. It’s safe to bet that by February, even without a gyrocopter, Martin O’Malley will not be ignored.
Copyright © 2015, *The Chicago Tribune *[/spoiler]
I’ve never heard the term “retail campaigning” before.
I think I probably first heard it in 1984-85, about Gary Hart’s very effective efforts in Iowa and New Hampshire.
That would explain it. I was two, and living in another country. 
No worries. It has been a relatively common American political phrase since then, though.
Thanks for posting the link. I have no clue how far O’Malley will make it in the primaries but the more I see, hear and read, the more I like.