Just sayin

His doctors say he's not healthy enough, and that he must cut back his campaigning, his rallies, his travel... that tells me that he's not healthy enough to be POTUS (which is even MORE stressful and demanding). Travel, long hours, sleep interruption, stress, stress and more stress... that can really take a toll on a person. We've all seen how the presidency ages a man by 20 years.

I hope Bernie listens to his cardiologists and doesn't "over-do" again... he needs to rest and take it easy.

healthy enough?

If they told him to "cut back" and "slow down" and to make fewer appearances, then they have indeed indicated that he's not healthy enough or strong enough for the rigors and activity needed for a full-out campaign. (This is a problem because ACTUALLY being the president requires even MORE stamina that simply campaigning.)

mean he is not healthy enough to be president. Just stop.

He has a very serious disease... it's nothing to ignore or make light of. Atherosclerosis, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (clogged arteries, hardening of the arteries, etc.) along with the "fainting spell" or "dizzy spell" which caused him to fall and bust open his head (likely caused by the same thing, or afib) should be taken seriously.

president. We have had numerous presidents with health issues that did not affect their capacity to govern. Ted Lieu just had the same procedure done, so in your estimation he is incapable of campaigning and holding his position in the house. Get a grip. People have stents all the time and lead normal productive lives. This is not a death sentence.

He has heart disease, cardiovascular disease. That is permanent. He's not "cured". He needs to PERMANENTLY change his behavior and avoid things like the stress and rigors and lack of sleep that are associated with the presidency and actually being able to perform the job competently. It's for his own good.

Having had a heart attack already and other heart-related cardiovascular issues, he's MUCH MORE likely to have another heart attack compared to a healthy man his same age. This is true no matter WHAT he does. (It's true. Look it up!) I think the risk is too great. I do not believe he has the stamina to withstand the rigors of the office.

About three to four weeks after the procedure, it may be safe to resume strenuous physical activity and lifting heavy objects; patients must receive clearance from their doctor. ... This could include exercise, quitting smoking, and following a healthy diet.

The examples provided are for people who live "ordinary" lives. Campaigning for the presidency (or actually being the POTUS) is not the same. I know the difference. Stress is a major factor. Being POTUS is much more stressful than people realize. I'm sure everyone has seen how much it ages a prime specimen of a man like Obama by 25 years. The odd hours, interrupted sleep, interrupted meals, skipped meals, travel, jetlag, stress, stress and more stress. The job is NONSTOP and 24 hours a day. That's a lot different than being cleared for "lifting a heavy object".

All I'm trying to get you to understand is that the job takes a toll on even the MOST healthy individual, and it's clear that he's NOT the "most healthy" of individuals... he has atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease which would lead to another heart attack or possibly a stroke. He needs to return to Vermont and serve out his term as Senator... that's the safest thing for him to do.

I care very much about his health, and I'm confident that's what Jane wants too.

important election and we are having a conversation reflecting on our loved ones experiences with heart attacks and heart disease and whether they lived or died. I just do not think that is a conversation we should even be having when discussing who we are supporting for the 2020 GE. It does not make sense to me.

I disagree. I think that it's important to put forth the best candidate who shines in ALL areas... that includes health, stamina, vigor, temperament and personality. All of these things are important and it makes zero sense to pretend that the voting public does not notice and does not (at least on some level) consider these things when making their final decision.

asking for votes for President of the United States at a very crucial time in our lives. And that he is as high as he is. What does not make sense is having a conversation about a man's heart health, and hearing about those that live and die, and that we are even considering putting him into office.

Can you imagine if he did win? All the time we would be watching to see if the man had to be rushed to the hospital or watching for signs of high stress.

It truly does not make sense to me that anyone would consider to vote for an 80 yr old with heart disease.

I agree.

when he first discussed it with her.

Campaigning for POTUS is a massive stressor, let alone actually doing the job, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is nothing to dismiss.

Dr. Babu Welch, a neurological surgeon with University of Texas-Southwestern’s O’Donnell Brain Institute, said that people who have had one aneurysm can always have another. People are supposed to undergo regular screenings shortly after they have an aneurysm, but then can space them out further as time goes on, he said.

Dr. Gavin Britz, director of the Houston Methodist Neurological Institute, said his research has revealed that people have a decrease in life expectancy after an aneurysm. The key, he said, is to make sure to catch them before they rupture.

You are correct that an incidence of an aneurism at middle age, decades after recovery is not a serious an ongoing health concern.

However, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in an elderly man is a very relevant health concern, especially in a demanding stressful job as leader of the free world. Being a Senator or Congressman is not anywhere near as stressful as serving as a competent POTUS.

To compare/equate the two in terms of evaluating the prognosis of health in elderly men, as you have tried to do, is certainly not supported by medical reasearch, especially with stress being a predominant factor in campaigning and serving as POTUS.

Chronic stress: a critical risk factor for atherosclerosis

I was simply debunking your claim that an elderly candidate with heart disease is no more of a health concern of an elderly candidate who had and recovered from an aneurism in his forties, using medical sources for citation.

Must have really hit a nerve.

If one feels a need to misrepresent the argument one is rebutting to make a point, then perhaps one's point needs to be reexamined.

when you replied to me thusly:

The surgery for this has changed drastically since Biden had his all those years ago. This woman is just fine and was out of the hospital the next day.

Of course, anyone who has had a heart attack can have another one and will have to be screened for it the rest of his life. I once had a boss who had his first heart attack at age 37 and had five more, even several after five-bypass surgery.

....has had two heart pumps installed.

As far as I know, the ex-boss is still alive and in his 80s. Heart attacks are not easy to recover from.

One of the reasons I believe that there's much more to this than we're being told is because it was transparently laughable for them to try and characterize his surgery as a simple "outpatient" procedure... when CLEARLY that's not the case, and EVERYONE knows it! Why lie? Why try to minimize the seriousness of it?

And the "fainting spell" (or "dizzy spell", depending... but obviously related and relevant) that resulted in him to cracking open his skull in the hotel shower... another VERY SERIOUS incident, and we were told "oh-it's-nothing... don't worry... nothing to see here" and that he had simply walked in to a corner clinic for help. GMAFB!

And if indeed they're trying to hide the seriousness of something that's OBVIOUSLY serious, then what else are we to suspect is also being withheld? It's a fair question. People deserve to know the truth.

My father had aortic aneurysm in the early 1980s when he was 70. Scary times indeed. Long surgery and long recovery, but he was fine after that. It did take him several months to return to work after that and he started very slowly.

So just stop it. Because if past health issues is a disqualification, then both Biden and Sanders should be out.

And that's certainly an issue. Especially in someone with a history of skin cancer, gout and possible unsteadiness, as with the shower door injury.


POTUS is a very different, far more stressful job than a Rep. It's 24/7. It's the executive position. We've seen firsthand what happens when someone in that office has issues - a single rep having health issues isn't a national issue, ,is it?

BTW, being a POTUS is not in any way shape or form a "normal" productive life.

longer work, so that is not a very good analogy.

And the analogy of people who have had that procedure done often go on to live "normal" lives when talking about someone whose ambition is the most powerful and stressful job in the world isn't really a good one when you think about it.

But yes, generally speaking, 40 year olds are far more resilient in healing from major health events than the elderly. That's why there are physicians who specialize in geriatrics.

Perhaps you can enlighten me on this, but my understanding is that Bernie is not a fitness enthusiast. That can contribute to frailty in the elderly, and physical health is strongly linked to mental health.

rain or shine - he's 77.

Bottomline - it depends on the person. NO generalizations needed.

Physical fitness and regular exercise is linked to longevity and mental health. I'm sure that your brother's health benefits greatly from his exercise regimen.

The candidate that I support will be one who has good posture. It will be a strong indicator that he (or she) is in good health.

https://www.bustle.com/p/9-ways-posture-affects-your-health-that-might-surprise-you-8793625

A major injury like a fall that breaks a hip be the catalyst for cognitive decline as well.

It's been theorized that Reagan's memory issues were accelerated into a full blown dementia by the assasination attempt.

My grandmother went into the hospital with a broken hip, and the cognitive decline was very clear. Even after she healed, she needed to go into assisted living. And that's despite the statistical tendency of women to retain their health later in life than men.

These sorts of age related health issues need to be addressed and transparently so in any candidate for POTUS.

That dizzy spell (or fainting spell) that BS had... the one where he cracked-open his head on the shower door in the hotel... that was pretty serious. Something like that warranted a trip to the ER, and Xrays and observation. Yet we were given some song-and-dance about how all he needed was a trip to the corner "Doc-in-the-Box" for some butterfly stitches.

It's my belief that they already knew about his condition and didn't want to take the proper precautions because that would reveal to the world what they knew internally. They wanted to downplay the seriousness of it and as a result they failed to provide the necessary care and treatment and diagnostic evaluation/observation that someone of his advanced years obviously needs when something like that happens.

There was very little doubt (looking at the photos) that he had suffered much more than a mere "bump" from bending over and bumping into a corner. That was a HARD IMPACT and that is something that is likely the result of dizziness or passing out resulting from afib or blood pressure fluctuations. We still don't know the whole story. Is he at risk of a stroke? Nobody knows because nobody is saying. Where are the medical reports?

I just think that it's best for everyone concerned (especially poor Jane, because you know she's had about all she can take of this) if he just withdraws and goes back to Vermont.

he "was not healthy enough."

When one needs to misrepresent someone's statements to make a point, perhaps one needs to reexamine one's point.

Politics
October 8, 2019 / 4:37 PM / 2 months ago
Democratic presidential hopeful Sanders says he was 'dumb' to ignore health warnings

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders said on Tuesday he had wrongly ignored warning signs about his health before suffering a heart attack last week, but that he did not think the scare would damage his campaign for president.

Sanders, one of 19 Democrats competing to take on Republican President Donald Trump in the November 2020 election, suffered chest pains on Oct. 1 while in Nevada for a campaign stop and abruptly canceled campaign events.

Outside his home in Burlington, Vermont, where he was recovering on Tuesday, the candidate told reporters he was “feeling good, getting some work done” after what his campaign later said was a myocardial infarction, a medical term for a heart attack.

“I don’t think it helps or hurts,” Sanders, 78, said of the health scare, adding that he was on his way to see a new cardiologist in Burlington.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-sanders-idUSKBN1WN2DV

I'm so sick of the gaslighting and people pretending like "it's nothing" and "no big deal" and "people have heart attacks every day, so why worry".

the owners of the media.

And policies that might disrupt the flow of profits to the corporations that own the US media are always denounced as impossible.

And in a system where legalized bribery=speech, what the people want comes second.

the GOP fighting Sanders, while Sanders fights the Democrats.

However, parlor games aside, Sanders has never gotten his campaign out of second gear and no evidence that it will ever happen at all, so my second guess is that our first guesses are a waste of time.

This helps to explain why we see so many posts with "drill-down" data that shows him leading the way... among under-30 Latinx college-educated voters who live in a large city or multi-level apartment dwelling and who drive a Prius. If one tries hard enough, a subset of voters (excluding those who do not support BS) can be artificially created and manipulated in such a way that it creates the illusion that BS is ahead.

as we have watched Trump over the last 3 years. Sanders really fails at gathering the best people for positions.

The fact that there are Jill Stein voters/loyalists on the campaign reveals much about judgement. It doesn't send a good message.

to be on his staff that actually votes Democratic in GE's? I am picturing cabinet and other position void of any real Democrat while representing Democrats. I find it incredibly ironic.

I have a real concern about his heart attack. I think to be taken seriously, Sanders really needs to have a conversation about who his VP options may be. We can be pretty confident any of the other Democrats would pick a solid replacement just in case they had to step into the presidential role. I do not have that same confidence in Sanders picking a VP and with his health issues, I think that is dire and a fair question to ask, before he gets a vote.

We want those Jill Stein and Biden supporters, but you seem so intent on vilifying them for 2016. Keep attacking them, and if Biden wins the nomination they may say screw it again in 2020.

I swear, some of you have learned nothing from 2016.

That makes no sense.

It's a mistake to try and kowtow to a handful of unreliable and kooky Stein voters who have no loyalty to the Democratic party nor interest in seeing it succeed ... when for half the effort we could attract hundreds of new voters who will vote for Democrats and who are more likely to vote Democratic down ticket; donate to Democratic candidates; volunteer; canvass; phone-bank; stuff-envelopes; work the polling places. The "power" of these Stein voters only exists when we rely on them rather than making a sincere effort to grow the party and GOTV.

I am going to presume that you trying to make a strawman argument, because if not then we are in trouble in 2020 if we start attacking people for votes they cast in 2016.

changed the russian interference or voter suppression of Democrats in those key swing states?

Please.... they were trashing Hillary and Democrats 24/7. We might as well have tried to court the NRA crowd.

he doesn't exactly have the best record of hirings / endorsements.

Sid

Sid

curmudgeon like attitude in public events where he is not the main part of the event, we have seen it many times. This attitude is carried over into all of his interactions with other politicians.

His lack of actual legislation over a very very long career, and not because he isnt smart or doesnt want some good stuff, he just couldnt ever get anyone to go along other than that one VA bill which was very good.

I fear that not only will he try and do stuff GOP will not allow us to do but he will make it hard for dems to do what he wants and not lose support.

HAVING SAID ALL THAT if he is the candidate you will see me LOVE HIM and tell everyone I LOVE HIM, because if I dont do that I might convince a fence sitter to stay on the fence. I will not do that, I wish I could say the same for some of his supporters.

Considering the due diligence that Bernie has taken vetting his campaign staff and the endorsements that he has given, I think a Bernie presidency would be very ominous.

His track record of legislative achievements doesn't provide much reassurance either. I suspect that his legislative agenda would stall, even if the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate. The Democratic Party would likely lose control after the 2022 elections and Bernie would most likely be considered as a lame duck president. The GOP would stall on any judicial appointments and the Supreme Court would be packed with more conservative judges after the 2024 election. I'll put my crystal ball aside now.

That is another big question I have with Sanders. There are things he thinks that are not so aligned with progressive and priorities he has that may not serve women and others well. He may put up judges that reflect his one sighted agenda. That does not always serve social justice. I remember now. I was concerned how he would stack judicial.

Along with VP, I would want this conversation, too.

I was disappointed in 2016 that he didn’t support Hillary earlier and more strongly.
Was also disappointed when he switched back and forth from Dem to Independent again.
Plus, I feel that Warren shares most of his views that I also share and that she’s a more “palatable” package to middle America than he is.
But, M4A May have mortally wounded her campaign.
Thursday’s nights debate will be interesting to see just how much she goes on the offensive and against which candidates.

I really doubt that sanders will be the nominee of the party. There are too many real democrats who have good memories and these democrats will not forgive or forget

"It’s a celebration much of Washington thinks has approximately zero chance of ever happening."

Less than zero. Ain't gonna happen.

because he always has, but this time instead of being just a +1 to Democrats in the senate he'd be the president.

Sanders is no Trump, but he's somewhat similar in being impatient and even disrespectful of laws and limitations on what he wants to do and given to ruthless, extremely aggressive politics when he sees them as a possible path to victory, or at least to defeating others if that was all that could be hoped for. I'd expect him to align with Republicans when it suited him, often using them against Democrats, and to align with Democrats when it suited him, which wouldn't be often enough.

As a populist leader, with reelection in mind Sanders would of course use his presidency to woo RW populists who currently prefer Trump and unite them with his LW populists. And there lies classic danger. In fact, that's exactly what our intelligence services say Putin's hoping to do -- unite Sanders' and Trump's populist followers under one leader so they can have a real rootin' tootin' good time.

Bottom line, at best I'd expect a very unhappy Democratic Party, a very hopeful Republican leadership, and a failed presidency: both because he's proven to experts that he's shockingly ignorant about the workings of the executive branch and sophisticated use of the power of the presidency and because he's proven that he's emotionally and intellectually unwilling to consistently cooperate with others to achieve common goals, where there are any. In the end, even if everything held together for a peaceful transition of power, the American people would be angry and disappointed with the Democrats, and a single term presidency followed by a Republican sweep would be all too possible.

There're actually some pretty close comparisons between Sanders and Jimmy Carter and what I believe would be likely to happen. Those similarities in the 1980s lead to Reagan, following a failed single-term Carter presidency with few achievements in spite of having both houses of congress controlled by Democrats! Problem was, instead of being an anticapitalist, anti-liberal-Democrat socialist like Sanders, Carter was a small-government conservative who also despised and conflicted with his liberal Democratic colleagues (see above).

Carter and Sanders are both interestingly famous among their colleagues for believing they know better than anyone who disagrees with them and being fatally unable to exchange ideas or take advice. Someone once described Carter as the kind who had to burn his own thumb to learn for himself that fire was hot. At that Carter was believed to have some knowledge and capability.

But because of his personal limitations, in spite of his virtues, Carter was just not the right stuff for that job. He squandered the wonderful, precious opportunity to achieve great advances (not for him national healthcare) through its Democratic Party trifecta, and his administration ended the glorious New Deal era with a pathetic whimper.

Followed by the dawn of the next 40 years of the conservative era heralded by reaganism.

(And, yes, Carter IS our first outstanding ex-president. But none of it was what we elected him for.)

Remember hearing that myth that BS "votes with Democrats 99% of the time"?? Fact is: he doesn't.

even bigger than he has in the past.

Scream socialism 24/7.
It just wont happen.

Not much since he doesn't play well with others.

They refuse to research facts to question the propaganda they listen to.

Why would anyone believe that a person that has such a thin record of proposing and winning cutting edge legistlation would step into the Presidency and be a super-star.

Lyndon Johnson was by far the best prepared person ever to step come into the presidency, if one looks at his abundant accomplishments as a congressman, and even he had monumental misses.

..they ignore how it can get done. We'd all like most of those things but being pragmatic keeps us in reality. You are right about LBJ.. He knew how to play this game and yes he could be a grade A asshole but he got stuff done both in Congress and could back up his talk.

complain about how bad things are, then they turn around and do actions that get a republican elected, and that republican makes things even worse. The problem is that group exercises zero reflection and thought that they had a hand in making things worse and that electing even a democrat that was imperfect to them would have resulted in them being closer to their nirvana state, instead of having to re-win battles that all of us viewed as settled.

Purity is killing us. We can't play that game this election. Our Republic will not survive if we gamble away our chance here.

The republicans started this whole shitshow under Reagan and it took all that time to brainwash enough people to go along with them. Undoing that is not going to happen in one election cycle no matter how much we need it do and want it to happen.

Bernie's supporters don't seem to know much about him.

even less chance he'd get many if any of his policy goals through Congress in his first term, and less chance than that he'd win a second term.

That said, I'll vote for him if I have to. But I'd rather see almost any of the other Democratic candidates get the nomination.

Go safe, then ....

As I said, I'm very worried.