Men Are Much More Likely to Think Hillary Clinton Isn’t Healthy Enough to Be President


Carlos Barria/ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

A new poll suggests that gender bias might account for a lot of those questions about Hillary Clinton’s health.

With the exception of her recent bout of pneumonia, Clinton is apparently in fine health. She’s released multiple letters from her doctor over the course of the presidential campaign, and none revealed any serious health concerns. But that didn’t stop the right-wing media from continuing to suggest that Clinton had some vague—but surely deadly—health problem that should prevent her from taking the presidency. Trump himself hinted at this during Monday’s debate, saying Clinton “doesn’t have the stamina” for the job.

Apparently the perception of Clinton’s health depends on whether the perceiver is a man or a woman. According to a new AP-GfK poll, there’s a distinct gender gap in who is willing to buy the conspiracy theories. The poll found that 45 percent of men said they were “only slightly or not at all confident” in Clinton’s physical fitness. Women were far less likely to think the first major-party female presidential nominee wasn’t physically up to the task, with just 34 percent lacking confidence in her health. Despite the fact that Trump hasn’t released as detailed a medical history, voters overall were more reassured, with 51 percent surveyed saying his health wasn’t a concern.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend