Reply #2: I understand what you're saying.... [View All]

[vi5]

But the fact is that there are any number of ridiculous things that people base their votes on and which persuade or dissuade them from voting for a candidate. Some of these are just natural inclinations, but others are ginned up by or have the fires stoked by the media.

We'd be hearing similar concerns if the person were not overweight but still had diabetes. Or if they weren't overweight but had severe asthma. Or if they weren't overweight but had epilepsy. Or if they weren't overweight but had hepititis. Or any number of other physical issues of concern.

The fact is that Christie isn't just a bit overweight and people are being picky. He is very overweight and very unhealthy and that is the root of what would be the issue. Yes, he's a horrible candidate. But good or bad candidate, Republican or Democrat, people are going to be concerned about the issue whether we like it or not.

I'm hardly svelt myself, but the notion that someone who is physically like Christie is healthy and not at all of any concern is just not a realistic assesement.

Yes, if what you'e talking about are gratuitous uses of his weight as a source of insult then sure. You are right, it's not productive and it's insulting and it's bad. But if what you're talking about is a discussion of whether or not people would vote for someone who had the same physical issues Christie has, then I don't think that's out of bounds as a discussion, as long as it stays reasonable and not insulting.