The team at Fox News recently went into great detail about the former First Lady’s current state of health, or lack there of, and whether or not she was physically able to endure all aspects of being a president. As one can presume, leading the nation is unbelievably stressful, tiring, and definitely requires someone that has what it takes to be fit for the office, and voters for this upcoming election are demanding more details on Clinton’s health status before they make their final opinion on the candidates.
Hillary has reportedly released what some presume is a “summary” of her health records, versus the actual in depth look into her medical past that the American public was after. The records she released depicted her as healthy, and noted that she had hypothyroidism, deep vein thrombosis, and a past elbow fracture, all of which are nothing to be deeply concerned with from a voter’s perspective.
According to a Rasmussen Reports survey, some 59% of the nation’s voters think that presidential candidates should be required to fork over their medical past and present status to the public. In the past, it was only 38%, showing a large jump in voters wanting to be fully aware of exactly who they are voting for.
At the end of the day, is the health of candidates really something that should be public information? It seems that a lot of this controversy has been sparked by recent images of people helping Clinton get up the stairs, and of her suffering through severe coughing bouts throughout her campaign. But, do the other candidates have any controversy over their current health status, or is this fueled by those that just will do anything to stop Clinton from being the next President?
Trump is two years older than Clinton, but his health hasn’t really been a topic of discussion in recent news. Certainly no one wants to vote for a candidate that they feel isn’t up to snuff to run the United States, so time will tell if more medical records become public information.