Too Fat To Be President?

Oh My..I think personally we need to not enter into political debates here...and focus in on why this forum exists...as a newbie here I hope to focus in our common thread..the success and challenges of weight loss...just my opinion.

This thread DOESN'T focus on politics, per see---it focuses on discrimination on the basis of weight/obesity.

This forum exists for MANY reasons, and weight-loss is only one of them. I think you'll enjoy your time here better if you don't start out trying to be a forum nanny.

To me weight generally shouldn't be an issue, but one political commentator made a point I hadn't considered.  He said that his weight would be an issue during the actual running for president because a level of fitness was required for the energy required for travelling to several places in one day as just one  example.

He said it is a gruelling exhausting schedule for someone who is very fit and would be impossible for someone who is not. 

Except I think that's nonsense.

First of all, many unfit people have been president and they handled the job just fine. Heck, one of our presidents used a wheelchair at times. Other have had heart attacks.

Second, they are assuming that he is unfit because he is fat. They have no idea how fit he is or isn't.

If he can run for governor and then do the job, then he's fit enough to be president.

Well, he's fit enough physically. I think he's unfit due to his political views, but that's another issue altogether.

I agree with you on his political views from what I know of them. 

I think it was Lawrence O'Donnell who made this comment and he was talking specifically about the rigor involved in running for office not afterwards if he was in the oval office'

It's a given now that candidates are travelling non-stop at a fast pace and with little sleep. It's exhausting even for someone very fit and his point/opinion was Christie wouldn't be able to keep up with the pace. Whether this is fair or not, is a different argument.
 (O'donnell also contrasted the difference between running a statewide campaign and a nationwide campaign in terms of rigor and physical demand.) 

But as for the unhealthy presidents,  the campaign trail wasn't nearly as demanding then as it is now. The media was different and so were the challenges of running.  That is probably our loss, but it is what it is. 

I wouldn't let my vote be affected by outward appearance.  It's cultural because  I'm also British -have you seen some of our nominees?  Google Michael Foot -Labour leader.  Go on...but brace yourself.  Mind you he lost, but not becuase of his appearance. 

 O'Donnell's point was he wouldn't be able to keep up.  Well, we won't know for sure- not now anyway.. 

O'Donnell may be right but I suspect he's making a common mistake -- equating health and fitness with weight.

He was rushed to the hospital recently for severe breathing problems triggered by his adult onset acute asthma, that's made worse by his morbid obesity.

There are plenty of people who weigh what he weighs who have no apparent health issues...he's not one of them.

-Cyn

 Just because the fellow's obese does not mean that he cannot competently run the country. I haven't heard any horror stories out of NJ about him from anyone living there, so he seems to be able to do that while weighing as much as he does. And just because he's fat doesn't mean he's not fit. My highest weight was 430, and I could still move quickly and had no health problems. 

William Howard Taft got stuck in the bathub. While he was President. (*grin*)