If Hillary Clinton is going to run for the Presidency in 2016, she’s going to have to look as good as Ronald Reagan did when he ran in 1980 — it’s that simple. Nobody worried about Reagan pushing 70 when he ran against Jimmy Carter (RR turned 69 in early ’80, having been born on 2.6.11) because he looked 55. But Hillary, who will turn 68 when the ’16 campaign begins in late ’15 (she was born on 10.26.47) and 69 just before 2016 election day, looks her age. You can argue that her looks won’t and shouldn’t matter, and you would be wrong. They always do.
On top of which Clinton had a health scare when she fainted late last year and suffered a concussion so she needs to reassure everyone that she’s a stayer.
In order to look as good as Reagan Clinton will need to lose a good 15 or 20 pounds (she clearly gained weight over the last couple of years during her tenture as Secretary of State) and if she’s smart she’ll have a little eye-bag and neck-wattle work done this year or next. Nothing drastic — just a little surgical touch-up. It’s the same thing as going to the hairdresser these days. Nobody cares, but if you look flabby and weathered they do care and might not vote for you.
Another reason Hillary needs to look younger is that she’ll be a boomer trying to succeed a young boomer-older GenX President, and younger voters may be reticent about handing the reins to a member of the generation that has basically hoarded all the wealth and poisoned the well and ruined the economic future of GenY. So she’ll need to project a youthful attitude in order to at least symbolically bond with people in the work force and not just retirement-age people, and it’s hard to do that when you look saggy and jowly.
You know another boomer who really looks “bad”, which is to say tired and creased and just about ready for euthanasia? Chuck Hagel with those awful bags under his eyes…Jesus! It’s so easy to take care of that stuff these days, and without it looking like you “did” anything.