For weeks now the Clinton campaign, her surrogates and many in the media have argued questions from the Trump campaign and its supporters about Clinton's health, stamina and energy on the campaign trail is sexist. It isn't.
Last night on CNN, media correspondent Brian Stelter argued questions or skepticism about Clinton's strength were veiled in sexism.
"We should be honest about the double standards that women sometimes face with regards to their health with the idea that sometimes women are portrayed as being weaker than men, how they have to work harder to show they are as strong as men, especially in work places, especially in politics, I think we should be honest with ourselves about some of the subtext here even as we rightly scrutinize her health today," he said on air.
This morning on Fox News, my regular debate opponent ad Democrat strategist Mary Anne Marsh, essentially argued the same thing.
Has everyone forgotten about the Republican primary just a few short months ago when Trump dubbed Jeb Bush "low energy" and Marco Rubio as "little Marco." Not to mention his classification of President Obama as weak?
Questions surrounding Clinton's strength, stamina and health are hardly sexist, but rather necessary given her desire to become president.