The Age Debate: Assessing the Capabilities
As we approach the upcoming 2024 presidential election, the ages of our candidates, Donald Trump at 78 and Joe Biden at 81, have become a significant point of discussion. Many people are questioning whether individuals of such advanced age should be running for the highest office in the country. The debate around this topic is multi-faceted and deserves a closer examination.
Age, in itself, shouldn’t be the sole criterion to disqualify someone from an endeavor, including running for president. The reason I believe this to be true is throughout my life, I’ve known many individuals in their 70s and 80s who were highly capable, especially mentally. They functioned at a high level in various roles. Conversely, I’ve also encountered many people in the same age group who would not be able to handle such demanding positions.
Here is a list of prominent worldwide government and business leaders who were or are in their 70s and 80s during their time in leadership roles and who have maintained significant influence and leadership roles in their later years:
Government Leaders:
Winston Churchill (UK Prime Minister): Served his second term from 1951 to 1955, aged 77-81.
Ronald Reagan (US President): Served from 1981 to 1989, aged 69-77.
Nelson Mandela (South African President): Became President in 1994 at age 75.
Shimon Peres (Israeli President): Became President in 2007 at age 83.
Business Leaders:
Warren Buffett (CEO of Berkshire Hathaway): Born in 1930, leading well into his 80s.
Rupert Murdoch (Executive Chairman of News Corp): Born in 1931, active into his 80s and 90s.
Sumner Redstone (Former Chairman of ViacomCBS): Born in 1923, active into his 90s.
George Soros (Investor and Philanthropist): Born in 1930, active into his 80s and 90s.
Carl Icahn (Investor): Born in 1936, active into his 80s.
Sheldon Adelson (CEO of Las Vegas Sands): Born in 1933, active into his 80s.
Bernard Arnault (CEO of LVMH): Born in 1949, active into his 70s.
Ratan Tata (Chairman Emeritus of Tata Sons): Born in 1937, active into his 80s.
Michael Bloomberg (CEO of Bloomberg LP and former Mayor of New York City): Born in 1942, active into his 80s.
The Role of Stress
The presidency is an incredibly stressful job, and stress management is a crucial aspect of maintaining longevity and overall health. Research consistently highlights the importance of limiting stress to extend one’s life. Given the intense pressure associated with being president, it’s worth considering how age impacts a candidate’s ability to manage stress effectively.
Stress has been shown to negatively impact longevity through various mechanisms. According to a study conducted by Yale University, chronic stress accelerates the aging process at the DNA level. This “epigenetic clock” reveals that prolonged stress can increase markers of aging and contribute to several health issues, such as heart disease, addiction, and mood disorders .
Additionally, research highlighted by the National Institute for Health and Welfare and published on ScienceDaily indicates that heavy stress is associated with a shorter lifespan. The study found that lifestyle factors influenced by stress could predict longevity, demonstrating the significant impact of stress on overall health and life expectancy .
For further details, you can refer to the sources from YaleNews and ScienceDaily.
A significant concern in this debate is the reliability of the information we receive about the candidates’ health and capabilities. Whether it’s family members, party affiliates, or the media, everyone has their own agenda. It becomes challenging to discern the truth amid these competing interests. Ideally, families and close associates would provide the best advice regarding a candidate’s capability. However, political motivations often cloud this judgment.
Watching the recent debate has raised questions about the candidates’ capabilities. For instance, President Biden’s performance led me to wonder about his family’s role in supporting his decision to continue. Mark Cuban in a post on X, said in part;
“He doesn’t have the energy or ability to shout him down, hold him accountable and laugh at Trump’s responses.
Joe could have held his own against a candidate that actually can discuss policy. But that wasn’t the challenge last night and Joe wasn’t prepared or capable of dealing with Donald and his style.”
In my opinion, if a candidate struggles in such settings, it does raise questions about their overall readiness for the presidency. Nonetheless, this doesn’t mean age alone should be a disqualifying factor.
The Media’s Role
Trust in the media is another critical issue. With each media outlet often pushing its own agenda, finding unbiased, reliable information becomes difficult. This situation is frustrating, as the public deserves truthful insights to make informed decisions. When evaluating candidates, it’s crucial to seek out trustworthy sources that provide educated and objective assessments of their capabilities.
When considering candidates in their 70s and 80s, it’s essential to focus on their health status and mental capacity. While age can bring wisdom and experience, it also comes with potential health concerns. The physical and mental demands of the presidency require a thorough understanding of each candidate’s ability to handle these pressures. This scrutiny is even more critical for older candidates compared to their younger counterparts like Presidents Obama, Clinton, and George W. Bush.
Final Thoughts
In conclusion, age should not be the sole criterion to disqualify someone from being president or involved in any significant endeavor. Instead, we must consider a combination of factors, including health, mental capacity, and the ability to manage stress. As voters, it’s our responsibility to listen closely, observe carefully, and seek out reliable sources to make informed decisions about the candidates’ capabilities. Age alone is not enough to make a judgment—it’s the overall picture that truly matters.
Expect to Win!
#xp2win
