Questions of Age and Withdrawal

It's been a long weekend for campaigners as they stomp around the Keystone State, except of course for Sen. John McCain who doesn't do any stomping, anywhere, especially with a knee injured by war. Since Reagan, there hasn't been much talk about the good old-fashioned age gap concerning presidential hopefuls.

Sen. McCain, however, has a full 12 years on the oldest Democratic candidate, Sen. Hillary Clinton—leaving Sen. Barack Obama as the youngest, 26 years Sen. McCain's junior.

On Sunday, the Daily News featured an article written by David Saltonstall concerning the matter of Sen. McCain's age. The 72-year-old senator has reportedly decided to make his personal doctors available next month. Although, according to Saltonstall, Sen. McCain's body has "withstood a degree of trauma unimaginable to most people," his age continues to trouble many voters.

In fact, 27 percent of likely voters for the 2008 elections feel that McCain's age renders them "'less enthusiastic' about his candidacy," said the Daily News. Sen. McCain, aware of this, continues to humor the media, the public, and late-night comics alike when the age issue arises.

On Politico today, a question is being asked of Sen. Clinton, and predictions are being made about the moves of Sen. Obama's campaign. The question deals with both Democratic candidates, but is directed towards the Clinton campaign: What does a campaign trail say about a candidate? According to Sen. Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, "[you] can tell a lot about a candidate by the campaign they run."

Most of this "drama" that, according to Politico, Sen. Obama does not currently deal with (post-Wright issue) has mostly risen out of the recent Mark Penn scandal—Sen. Clinton's former chief strategist.

Sen. Obama's campaign will most likely utilize this rough patch in Sen. Clinton's trail, in addition to Sen. Clinton's recently exposed vote for the war in Iraq, which could potentially, "seriously hurt her with activist Democrats," says Roger Simon of Politico.

On Swampland, a Time blog, Michael Scherer writes not about what has happened on the campaign trail, but what is to be expected. This Tuesday night, April 8, the candidates for 2008 will question Gen. David Patraeus, the commanding general in Iraq. Aside from the most recurring themes (i.e. to withdraw or not to withdraw), this article cites a "nine-page briefing paper" assembled by the U.S. Institute of Peace that deals with the strategic effects and interests of the United States in Iraq including a list of five categories in interests at stake:

1. 1. Prevent Iraq from becoming a haven or platform for international terrorists.
2. 2. Restore U.S. credibility, prestige and the capacity to act worldwide.
3. 3. Improve regional stability.
4. 4. Limit and redirect Iranian influence.
5. 5. Maintain an independent Iraq as a single state.

The briefing deals not with debates on the immediate withdraw of troops in Iraq, but rather deciding on what national interests those concerned with the issues and events of Iraq they "hold most dear" and devising ways to advocate those national interests in the direction of Iraq. Scherer says, "If past is prologue, the day will end with a frustrating dearth of actual discussion about the complex situation on the ground and the difficult choices that the next president will face."

Choose wisely.