Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I would vote for an overweight Jerald Nadler

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 07:57 PM
Original message
I would vote for an overweight Jerald Nadler
before a svelte Perry, Romney, Backman, et all, because their POLITICS trumps how much they weigh. Come on, people, this is a no brainer. I don't care how overweight, or "in shape", a candidate is. Their political views "outweigh" their physical weight. Chris Cristie's weight is a total non issue for me. His political views count him out TOTALLY as a candidate for me, and his weight is just a distraction.

For what is its worth, I am a woman who weighs 98.5 lbs. So take THAT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. BIngo
I asked the question in another thread --about whether if the overweight candidate were a strong liberal or progressive, would we be wringing our hands about his/her weight. I dare say I think not.

(A woman who USED to weigh 98.5 pounds but no longer does. But hey, I still at least wear a size 6).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. You seem to be mixing concern about health with bias towards the overweight...
The two are not interchangeable and to suggest that ANY of us would not vote for an overweight Jerald Nadler over a svelte Perry Romney, Bachmanno or any RETHUG is just ridiculous. It isn't appearance that is the issue for most whose comments I have read--it is concern as to whether the individual is HEALTHY, though overweight, or exceeding UNHEALTHY and overweight, since the latter might reflect their ability to finish there term. While we would hope that any Dem presidential nominee would have chosen a very good Vice President, would step in should that become necessary, when you look at who is next (currently John Boehner :eyes:), it becomes a very real consideration.

Being overweight currently myself, though active and healthy, I certainly would never base a vote on "sveltness"... But, given the increased health risk that long term obesity carries for many (not all) people, it would be something I would want to explore and consider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Their BRAINS mean more than their bodies
That is the point. I suppose you wouldn't vote for somebody who is in their 70s either because they are old and not as "healthy" as a 40 year old? That is absurd. That 40 year old is going to live a lot longer than a 70 year old, no matter how healthy that 70 year old is. So you would vote the 40 year old instead?

Sorry, no. I wouldn't. Their politics means more to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. You have become outrageous in your accusations.
Edited on Tue Sep-27-11 09:16 PM by hlthe2b
Where, WHERE, HockeyMom did I say anything of the kind to suggest I would not vote for an older candidate. Yes THAT is absurd... the suggestion that someone would do so--only slightly less than your outrageous and totally unjustified and disingenuous accusation towards me. Perhaps you need to take a breath before making such outlandish assumptions.

If you can't discuss/debate without falsely attributing positions, beliefs, and attitudes to others, who have given you no reason for doing so, then I think you have a problem. Your lashing out at me, who is nearly in complete agreement with you--certainly as far as qualifications being the key issue and being absolutely outraged at those who promote bigotry and ridicule towards those who are overweight-- is incredibly ironic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thank you.
To be prejudiced about the color of another's skin is no less acceptable than being prejudiced about the amount of another's skin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. Nadler is fat because he is severely diabetic. Christie is fat because he's a glutton.
ie. he has a severe character flaw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Do you think he has an addiction to food?
:shrug:


Do you think he can overcome his addiction to food, as it's believed Obama has with nicotine?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Bullshit post. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. yes, I get annoyed seeing obese people get mocked, also the other standards "no teeth" etc, it's
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-28-11 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
10. it is nasty and cruel and elitist and not just to Chris Christie but to everyone who is overweight
A lot of poor and working class people and a lot of ethic minority people are also very heavy, Do we want to completely alienate them? Besides his appearance will draw attention to itself anyway.

The results of the poll in both this forum and in the General Forum and some of the comments are a disgrace. Some people need to take some time off and sit down and be ashamed of themselves for awhile.

There are plenty of things to attack Cristi over. There is no need for this.

Call me old fashion and square. But I think that discussion about campaigns should be based around:

1. Their positions on issues. What does their record actually say and what is their actual officially stated positron? There is a temptation to project onto candidates what one wants to hear.

2. Whether or not they are competent, smart and do they know what they are talking about.

3. Whether they hold an authoritarian or a libertine view of the world. I don't want either a left-wing puritan telling me what to do in my private life or a right-wing demagogue sticking their nose into my personal business.

4. Are they electable or at least how does their campaign affect the political culture and range of discussion.

5. What are their political alliances and who is financing them?

6. Are they a crook?

There are plenty of things to talk about when it comes to candidates - both the candidates we like and the ones we disdain. Nastiness about personal matters like weight or what they wear or other irrelevant personal matters are of no concern and only deeply damages the political culture and the country and only makes society all the more shallow, ignorant and nasty.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-28-11 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. There's no need to mock him, but if he were a candidate for whom I'd want to vote
Edited on Wed Sep-28-11 01:56 AM by CakeGrrl
I would make automatic comparisons to the standard President Obama has set in terms of the sheer rigor of his schedule and relative lack of vacation time, particularly compared to GWB.

President Obama submitted the results of his physical during the primaries as proof of his physical fitness to meet the demands of the office.

I recall Jon Huntsman having some issues with room ventilation or something that exacerbated some breathing issues during the announcement of his candidacy. Michelle Bachmann was reported to suffer severe migraines. Health matters to some degree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-28-11 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Franklin D Roosevelt had polio. You can't get much poorer health than that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC