Certainly there is no problem with a 72 year old running for president in general - many older people have been leaders of other countries. However, my father-in-law, who is now 93, is voting for a Democrat for the first time ever since he thinks McCain is showing signs of being able to keep only one thought in his mind at a time, and he knows how it feels. By the way, my f-i-l is still composing music on commission, and has not trouble using the Internet. Even with hands not in the best shape.
Now I wouldn’t mind, but McCain has been showing signs of confusion lately. The fundamentals answer seems to be stock, done without thought, like stuff my father (92, not in great shape) says. He was confused about Spain. He was confused about the chairman of the SEC, which is something I’m sure he used to know.
This is not something that should be used for political advantage, but especially considering that Ms. Nitwit would be taking over, shouldn’t McCain volunteer to be checked for possible memory loss? Isn’t too much at stake to not bring this up out of politeness?
John McCain is in the process of losing it. I do not speak as a Democrat but as one who has cared for old people. It is time for him to rest on his laurels and bow out of public life. He has chosen not to, and a multitude of people, right and left, have castigated him for it.
Dude, when dyed in the wool conservatives tell you it’s time to retire, do it.
The McCain campaign knows they have a problem on their hands, as shown by how they presented his health records to reporters - three hours to examine 1500+ pages, no copying. Unbelievable!
My wife is pretty touchy about age being correlated with infirmity of any sort. I don’t know quite why…she’s in her 30s, so age comments have never been directed at her personally. She’s bristled at me before when I’ve mentioned McCain’s age…and I should mention that she’s totally an Obama supporter.
Yesterday, she agreed with me that McCain is suffering from something, be it stress, juggling contradictory viewpoints, a mental malady, or just gettin’ old.
I’m glad to know I’m not the only one to notice he’s been progressively losing his acuity (for whatever reason).
Uh, look, I don’t want to be a downer, or anything, but if he takes the dirt nap, does that mean that Mooseolini is the Presidential nominee? Which would mean that if, like, an asteroid hit Obama, then…
I’ve never cared for the requirement to have everyone’s name and title handy, so the Prime Minister of Spain thing didn’t mean much to me. But not knowing where Spain was indicated to me a severe mental lapse. Even if temporary, they guy is now on his way out of being a functioning non-retired adult. I also don’t care about not knowing the SEC chief could not be fired. Practically speaking he can be. I also don’t care that Palin didn’t know the “Bush Doctrine” by that name. I didn’t. Although I am pretty familiar with the “preemptive invasion” doctrine, legality and logic. She should have known that when prompted, and she didn’t.
in the u. s. election spectacle nothing is set in stone until the electors meet (in dec.) and vote. then the pres. and vice pres. are set in stone and the steps spelled out in the constitution would be followed if one of them should fall into misfortune.
up to that point pretty much anything can go.
pre-election it would be up to the reb. or dem. comm. to decide who should take the place of the unfortunate, and it could be anyone.
post-election it would be up to the electors to decide. once again they could if they wanted to pick anyone. (this was part of the scuff up in 2000. the count-recount thing had to be solved before the electors vote.)
I’m not sure if you’re ever serious, but since others might wonder, the technical answer is no. Technically, the Republican Party would have to nominate someone else. They could choose to nominate Palin, but in all likelihood would scrounge up someone else, like Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, who was considered during the primary process.
Not to hijack too much, but I don’t think he forgot where Spain was. The interviewer said “let’s talk about Europe,” and I’m pretty sure he thought she said “your (something).” The problem there was that he tried to bullshit his way through the question when he clearly didn’t understand it. Then his campaign said he knew exactly what he was talking about ! Unbelievable.
The only age-related problem that I think McCain has is the “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” problem. I also think that McCain’s other problem is that he’s operating outside of his comfort zone. I feel that he truly does want to be the Maverick guy, and probably would be that guy again after getting elected, but he’s already chosen his path, which is to be a real Republican for the moment.
McCain gives the impression of a nervous teenager on his first date. Doesn’t know what to say, how to say it, and can’t figure out what to do with his hands…but knows if he could figure this stuff out he might get to first base with the electorate.
The 1980 debate dramatically reversed the candidates’ fortunes. Polls indicated a statistical dead heat; Reagan immediately pulled way ahead as a result of the debate.
Yeah, I know about that one. Surely if anything though, the analogy goes that Obama is like Reagan. The country wanted change, they weren’t sure if he was up to it etc.
Has anyone actually managed to reverse a significant lead (say over +2) via debates though?
Why would the Pubbies have any problems with an out of it McCain? They ran Strom Thurmond as a sock puppet for years after he had deteriorated to the point where no idea who he was or where he was.
