In an interview with Politico that ran on Monday, Rand Paul seemed to express concern that Hillary Clinton might not be young and spritely enough to run for president at the age of 67.
“I think all the polls show if she does run, she’ll win the Democrat nomination,” Paul said. “But I don’t think it’s for certain. It’s a very taxing undertaking to go through. It’s a rigorous physical ordeal, I think, to be able to campaign for the presidency.”
(He is correct. Ronald Reagan, who was sworn into office at age 69, nearly lost the election after he was bested by Jimmy Carter in a pull-up competition.)
Republican strategists have long been clear about making age an issue if Clinton runs in 2016, and Paul and his colleagues have clearly gotten the memo. Some, like Paul, have opted to subtly draw attention to the age gap (Paul is 51), while others, like Mitch McConnell, have been, uh, more explicit.
Asked last year what he thought about the Democratic field in 2016, McConnell said it reminded him of “a rerun of ‘The Golden Girls.'"