| From: | Jeff  (webwizard.vegsource.com)
| |
| Some comments | ||
| October 1, 2008 at 6:47 am PST | ||
This is a very interesting and provocative piece by Dr. McDougall.
It is true that Obama is in better health than McCain, that Obama has something like a 2% chance of dying in office, while McCain has a 50% chance (over 8 years, 38% in four years, according to the article). I believe it's also true that Obama would likely look more favorably on legislation which improved Americans' health, versus mollifying the lobbyists from the food and restaurant industry.
At the same time, one candidate being healthier does not automatically make them a better candidate. Consider that FDR -- arguably one of the greatest presidents we had -- was in terrible health, wheelchair bound, and died in office (granted it was his 4th term). Lincoln -- beloved by many -- suffered from debilitating depression. On the other side, GW Bush is in very good health, and is perhaps the worst president ever.
So simply possessing good health is not qualification for high office.
I think what Dr. McDougall is highlighting is that in McCain's case, where he is older and has higher odds than his opponent of being incapacitated or dying, his VP choice becomes much more significant than Obama's. There is a much stronger likelihood that Palin would become president if McCain won, than that Biden would become president if Obama won. And that's a valid thing to consider.
