With the US elections in full swing it got me around to thinking about the age of both candidates and the obvious question for me was, are they both too old? I don’t intend to talk about their politics or policies and who would be better for the US and the world. As far as the US is concerned it is up to them for who they vote for and up to the rest of the world to deal with whoever they offer up. Also, I have no formal qualifications so what I express below comes from a personal view and nothing else.
The incumbent, Donald Trump, was born in 1946 and the person who is wanting to knock him out of office, Joe Biden, was born four years earlier in 1942. With age we are told comes experience, knowledge and wisdom. Also, with age comes health issues, which can detract from the performance of a person, and in some cases senility and other mental health issues can manifest.
With both candidates well into their 70s are they capable of dealing with this ever-changing world that, from my point of view, younger people are more adept at dealing with? Trump is renowned for his avid use of Twitter, a modern-day communication medium that young people love, but I don’t think he has grasped that Twitter rants at 3am are doing him more harm than good. Biden on the other hand seems to use social media discretely and probably leaves it up to one of his many media advisers to handle it all. As I have a dislike for social media, I score the eldest of the two more highly here.
Do these old candidates understand the world we live in and can they relate to the younger people and can the younger people relate to them? If there is no connection between these parties, or worse, animosity, then there is bound to be unrest for the next four years.
Both candidates have shown bouts of forgetfulness during the campaign. None more apparent than when Biden seemingly referred to Trump as George. Most pundits observed this as Biden referring to George W Bush who hasn’t been in the Whitehouse for 12 years. He later said he was mentioning some obscure person who works in the background, but it came over as a hollow excuse. Glory be to any politician who owns up to a mistake, which Biden should have done. They get far more respect from the hoi polloi than someone who tries on a lame excuse that everyone sees through.
I could go on about things that both candidates have done that question their suitability for the top job, but I will leave it at that. My opinion is that Americans are faced with a poor choice when they cast their vote that could determine where America fits in the political maelstrom that the world is faced with.
The argument for younger leaders can be best illustrated here at home where for the last 13 years our Prime Ministers have mostly been under the age of 60. I can hear you say we have had some duds, and I couldn’t agree more with you. Both sides have produced good and bad leaders in this time, but on the whole, we have been well served by energetic people that are capable of meeting the rigours of high office.
Prime Minister, Scott Morrison is only 52 years old, didn’t join a political office out of university but worked in marketing before becoming a politician. He was first elected in 2007 at the age of 39 and was promoted early to the front bench. He currently seems to be doing the job well and I think his life experience before entering politics bodes well for him. The other side of politics also has members that fall into the same category as Morrison and would do an equally good job if ever given the opportunity.
In conclusion, and at the age of 63, I believe we are better served by people who can withstand the physical and mental rigours of the job. These are people in their 50s who have experienced life and
should be mature, yet young enough to relate to the younger generation. We have had exceptions in Hawke and Howard and their mentorship would have been appreciated by following leaders.