The flamboyant conservative talk show host, Rush Limbaugh has launched his lowest attack yet on the Democratic front runner, Hillary Clinton. Discussing an unflattering picture of Clinton on the net, Limbaugh asked: “Will this country want to actually watch a woman get older before their very eyes on a daily basis?”
Limbaugh pointed out that Hillary is stuck with a looks-obsessed culture and that the presidency ages its occupants drastically. (If Hillary won two terms she would leave office aged 68). Limbaugh says that aging makes men look more authoritative, accomplished, distinguished. “Sadly its not that way for women and they will tell you.”
And Limbaugh went on to suggest that a President Hillary Clinton would be forced to have face surgery or some such: “There will have to be steps taken to avoid the appearance of her aging.”
There’s no denying that looks matter in politics. JFK’s tan and Nixon’s five o’clock shadow helped turn the 1960 election in Kennedy’s favour. But women seem to be scrutinized more critically on their looks which depend to a greater extent on lighting, bloating and wardrobe. (Remember the furore when Hillary showed a bit of decollatage).
Often Hillary looks great; sometimes she looks tired, heavy and puffy.
Do you think a presidential candidate’s looks are part of the package?
Does Hillary meet the standard?
Do you agree that male presidential candidates age better than women do?