Is Joe Biden Too Old to Run?

The age issue is obviously one that will confront Biden, and his potential candidacy even more — notably, he is almost five years older than Hillary Clinton.

National Journal
Charlie Cook
Feb. 17, 2014, 3:05 p.m.

I ar­gued in a column last week that, des­pite the con­ven­tion­al wis­dom that Hil­lary Clin­ton is cer­tain to run for pres­id­ent in 2016, there’s a de­cent chance — maybe 30 per­cent — that she won’t. Ob­vi­ously, that means there’s still about a 70 per­cent chance that she will.

The art­icle’s point was very de­lib­er­ately not to make a case that she ab­so­lutely would or wouldn’t run. My in­ten­tion was purely to point out that chances are pretty fair that she may not run (per­haps more of one than many have sug­ges­ted).

It would hardly be pos­sible for any­one to ar­gue that she lacks the am­bi­tion to run. However, Clin­ton — who turns 67 in Oc­to­ber — will pre­sum­ably be mak­ing her “go or no go” de­cision soon after her next birth­day. That de­cision, if in the af­firm­at­ive, would ef­fect­ively be a nine-year com­mit­ment. One year to run, and, if suc­cess­ful, the four years of a first term be­gin­ning at age 69. This would be fol­lowed by — if she were reelec­ted — a second term at 73. In­clude the four years of a second term, and Hil­lary could pre­sum­ably be leav­ing of­fice at age 77. Giv­en the health scare she had dur­ing her fi­nal year as sec­ret­ary of State, the choice to take on an even more phys­ic­ally de­mand­ing chal­lenge three years later, i.e. run­ning for pres­id­ent, would not be a de­cision to be made eas­ily or lightly.

The re­ac­tion to that piece was some­what dis­may­ing on sev­er­al levels. The vast ma­jor­ity of the more than 4,200 com­ments that ap­peared on na­tion­al­journ­al.com were anti-Clin­ton and among the most vit­ri­ol­ic that I have en­countered in 28 years of column writ­ing. It’s proof that no mat­ter how po­lar­iz­ing Pres­id­ent Obama has been, no mat­ter how much many con­ser­vat­ives des­pise him, he has in no way dis­placed their deep-seated hatred for the Clin­tons. The bile just poured out of the screen as if we were back in the 1990s, a very un­subtle re­mind­er of how much polit­ics have changed in the past 30 years. Back then, while emo­tions ran high, things wer­en’t quite this per­son­al. It’s this cur­rent volat­il­ity that could very well be an­oth­er reas­on why Clin­ton may ask her­self, “Life is too short; why would I want to put up with this crap an­oth­er time?”

But again, in all prob­ab­il­ity, she will run. And, at least for the Demo­crat­ic nom­in­a­tion, she would be a very dif­fi­cult can­did­ate to stop. She would also likely be a very for­mid­able op­pon­ent for any Re­pub­lic­an nom­in­ee to de­feat.

The pro-Hil­lary Clin­ton side largely held their fire, but I did get a bit of sen­ti­ment that some saw the column as im­plied sex­ism — des­pite the fact that I ex­pli­citly stated that Clin­ton’s age at the time of the 2016 elec­tion would be ex­actly the same as that of Ron­ald Re­agan when he was elec­ted in 1980. I also poin­ted out in the column that the age ar­gu­ment was used against him in both 1980 and 1984, but it didn’t seem to work. Left un­stated was why I chose not to dis­cuss Joe Biden, who will turn 74 two weeks after the 2016 elec­tion. Biden wasn’t brought up in that piece be­cause the column was not about the vice pres­id­ent. The age is­sue is ob­vi­ously one that will con­front Biden, and his po­ten­tial can­did­acy even more — not­ably, he is al­most five years older than Clin­ton.

For either Clin­ton or Biden, the chal­lenge is to make them­selves, and their can­did­a­cies, more rel­ev­ant to the fu­ture than to the past. The young­est voters in 2016 were 2 years old when Bill Clin­ton left of­fice in 2000 and were not born when Biden first ran for pres­id­ent; in­deed, many of their par­ents may not yet have been born when Biden was elec­ted to the Sen­ate in 1972. Hav­ing elec­ted, and reelec­ted, Obama, him­self a mem­ber of Gen­er­a­tion X, the 2016 elect­or­ate poses a sig­ni­fic­ant prob­lem for any po­ten­tial can­did­ate.

Ap­peal­ing to the baby-boom co­hort in the near fu­ture would re­quire a can­did­ate to make a very de­lib­er­ate de­cision to step back a gen­er­a­tion in terms of tar­geted voters and cam­paign strategy. The gen­er­a­tion­al dif­fer­ence between Obama and John Mc­Cain in 2008 may or may not have been rel­ev­ant to the out­come of that elec­tion; however, it cer­tainly was no­tice­able. It’s worth not­ing that, purely spec­u­lat­ively, vir­tu­ally all of the names on the Re­pub­lic­an side in 2016 would be far young­er than either Clin­ton or Biden.

If people want to spec­u­late about Clin­ton — should she run, will she run, how well would she run — it is im­port­ant to note that these same ques­tions are just as ap­plic­able and ap­pro­pri­ate when con­sid­er­ing Biden. Hav­ing been burned by one in­ev­it­able Hil­lary Clin­ton nom­in­a­tion, afi­cion­ados would be bet­ter ad­vised to con­sider all of the vari­ous per­muta­tions of Demo­crat­ic fields, and re­mem­ber that all de­cisions about run­ning are not purely polit­ic­al.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4735) }}

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×