Hillary Clinton Is A Woman And Too Old For The White House, Some Say

United States has clearly evolved a milestone when the first black president has not just been elected once, but twice. Now that election fever is on again, a lot has been spoken, favourable or otherwise, about the first strongest female contender for the White House — Hillary Clinton.

It is easy to understand why the former first lady is a magnet of criticisms. She is fearless in speaking her thoughts even against her male counterparts. Seeing her boldly speaking her minds on and off the cameras about current issues — political, cultural, economic or environmental — does not stir curiosity why people from across the world buy her ideas.

Old Age — Bullish or Bearish?

Yet on the bleak side, a few of her critics find an issue on Clinton’s age of 67, saying people on their late '60s or early '70s are vulnerable to health concerns. Her age has been magnified because Bloomberg reports Clinton has “a burst appendix” which is among the few non-life threatening incidents more common to the elderly. The report continues that while health issues may also hit other political bidders, they are more likely to affect Clinton due to her age. And for that, her old age might cost her the White House.

Others think otherwise, however. New York Times surmises the Democrats lead in party identification with Pew Research Center survey stating 48 percent of adults identify as Democrats in contrast with 39 percent who identify as Republicans. What that figures mean is that “younger millennials lean Democratic at nearly the same rate as older ones.”

The Female Of The Species

The former first lady of the White House is simply unyielding on issues that several politicians are hesitant or would rather “play safe” on when cameras start to roll. But it is not because of her gender. The better half of former United States President Bill Clinton will not win – if she would indeed win — simply because she is a woman.

American voters emphasized they are not interested whether the candidate has a Y chromosome as CNN says those voters would not be bullied into voting merely due to “false cries of sexism.”

Rather, she might win the votes of a few millions of Americans for her feminism or her active fight for humanitarian rights and her clear characterisation of the modern day women. Should she win, her victory will not have to do with her being a female as a study disclosed that having a woman as a leader does not guarantee success.

Nonetheless, Clinton has great chances for her dynamic knowledge earned through years of first-hand diverse experiences. “We have for eight years followed the policy that you have described. And I think we’ve gone backwards. We’ve gone backwards in the real, genuine care that we have given to women,” The Guardian quoted Clinton when she defied the policies implemented during former President George Bush’s era.

The New Yorker further discloses that Clinton’s anticipated nomination and eventually announcement for presidential bid is the belated righting of a historical wrong: a feminist landmark within reach, almost a century after women achieved the vote in the United States with the passage of the 19^th Amendment in 1920. But Clinton does not have the sole support of fellow feminists, if one would say that she is. Incumbent President Barack Obama waved his upper thumb for his former secretary of state.

For comments or feedback on the article, contact the writer at kizmet@ymail.com.