Should all nominees for presidency (2 party, so far) have health tests?

And should those tests be made public so those voting have a more informed decision on which they would prefer to take Presidency? This is a slippery slope. Health records should be kept private. But it also makes sense to know if a candidate is healthy enough to do the job for which he/she has been voted in to do.

What are your thoughts on this? (Idea of this poll comes from the discussion about Ron Paul and possible Alzheimers).

If you voted OTHER, please explain.

I don't think it should be required, but votes can draw their own conclusions and risks then on circumstantial speculations.

John McCain provided voluminous materials when some implied that the combination of torture and his age might have serious health risks. I seem to recall Obama only provided 1 page from his doctor saying Obama was healthy.

Voters never have to take any candidate at his/her word and if there is a perception of health issues a candidate can address those with documentation. Failing to do so then each voter can draw their own conclusions on whatever lay information and sense the person has.

Enola said:

And should those tests be made public so those voting have a more informed decision on which they would prefer to take Presidency? This is a slippery slope. Health records should be kept private. But it also makes sense to know if a candidate is healthy enough to do the job for which he/she has been voted in to do.

What are your thoughts on this? (Idea of this poll comes from the discussion about Ron Paul and possible Alzheimers).

If you voted OTHER, please explain.

Click to expand...

I would say that the public's interest in security from a president with compromised decision-making abilities is far far far more important than a president's right to medical confidentiality regarding those types of illnesses.

For this to be a "slippery slope" issue being President would have to be similar to other types of jobs. It is not.

Enola said:

And should those tests be made public so those voting have a more informed decision on which they would prefer to take Presidency? This is a slippery slope. Health records should be kept private. But it also makes sense to know if a candidate is healthy enough to do the job for which he/she has been voted in to do.

What are your thoughts on this? (Idea of this poll comes from the discussion about Ron Paul and possible Alzheimers).

If you voted OTHER, please explain.

Click to expand...

No - I don't think it's that big of a deal. We've had 8 presidents die while in office - and 4 were assassinated leaving the other 4 that died of other causes - none of which were forseeable. In fact - the 4 causes of death were Pnumonia, Gastroenteritis, Heart Attack and Cerebral Hemorage.

There's no evidence to back up the belief that hteir pre-presidential health determines their life expectancy while in office.

I liken their health records made public (although it seems a bit unethical) to celebs who complain that they can't go anywhere or do anything without fans wanting an autograph. They knew in advance what the pros and cons were prior to wanting to be a movie star and now can shut up with the whining. Same with pres. Get the nod from your party to run against the other side's choice? Then pony up with a health/competency report.

Which president would you have NOT voted for if you knew he was ill, or had a brain tumor that could affect his decision making later on and VP winds up taking over?

It's the highest office held. With much responsibilty. But that position is empty without backup from the senate. So that is where the slippery slope comes in to play. Who has to show their health records? Just the guy sitting in the chair for 4 years or everyone who has the power to hold him back..like the senate?

Enola said:

And should those tests be made public so those voting have a more informed decision on which they would prefer to take Presidency? This is a slippery slope. Health records should be kept private. But it also makes sense to know if a candidate is healthy enough to do the job for which he/she has been voted in to do.

What are your thoughts on this? (Idea of this poll comes from the discussion about Ron Paul and possible Alzheimer's).
This man is running for a public office and his health is in question, as was M. Dukaksis's (he ran for office about 20 years ago and was crucified by the press for supposed mental problems...)..
I doubt if the American people are up to this level of acceptance yet..If you voted OTHER, please explain.

Click to expand...

Nor do I think it is good to have one's medical records so private... The problem here is the people and their human nature ("bad" side)