• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Real Reason Hillary's Health Is At Issue

LowDown said:
I suppose it's good that she picked a fairly reasonable person for VP. But "I may drop dead but I have a good VP to replace me" isn't a very good defense. The other issue of health is mental health. Having a crazy, demented, or unstable president isn't good. The latest rumor is that she has a handler with a diazepam pen following her around. What can Clinton say to dispel these rumors when people don't believe anything she says?
Click to expand...

Here's the thing though, none of the confirmed health issues of which Hillary suffers suggests she may drop dead any moment; instead they're manageable old-age health concerns that don't impede a person leading a cognitively/psychologically demanding life. This is the defense in question; as an old person, I, Hillary, suffer from a number of age-related health issues that don't render me unfit for the role of commander in chief, and in case misfortune strikes and incapacitates me, I have a replacement intimately involved in my stint and was subject to the electorate's choice.

The more serious health issues of which she allegedly suffers are the inane concoctions of her political opponents. She's under no obligation to defend them, and honest partisans shouldn't buy into the asininity.
 
joG said:
Like in the case of McCain it is important who the VP is.
Click to expand...

So? Her electoral victory is the legitimization of Tim Kaine not only as her second-in-command, but also as her potential replacement.
 
_Sal said:
yes

it's mental masterbation

they think of it and they orgasm

it's the nature of the beast
Click to expand...

The beast ought to alter his diet; the stench is barely bearable.
 
Gaztopian said:
So? Her electoral victory is the legitimization of Tim Kaine not only as her second-in-command, but also as her potential replacement.
Click to expand...

Isn't that ultimately why the VP is so important?
 
LowDown said:
Yes, who knows what Hillary's health status really is? She lies and lies and lies about everything. For all we know she has a cancer eating her trachea away. For all we know she'll keel over any minute. We do know for certain that we can't trust a thing she says about it.

https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2016/09/06/hillarys-health/
Click to expand...


I think that people on the right need to stop confusing accusations they have made with fact. Hillary has lied in the past about various things and it has been documented. That does not justify a claim that (1) she lies about everything, and therefore the further claim, (2) everything she says should be treated as a lie.

Perhaps more importantly, they need to be more honest and consistent. For example, Trump has flip-flopped on pretty much every issue AND lied about having done so. He lies about all sorts of things. Fact-checkers show him leading in outright lies. He manages to be even more dishonest than Hillary.

So why isn't the right just as mad as Trump, if it's so important that they accuse Hillary of lying? Do people think that the fact that they accused Hillary of lying FIRST means that now it doesn't matter if someone accuses the right's candidate of lying? That an accusation functions like being "on base"?


Gaztopian said:
The mental retardation of the right wing knows no limits. What point is there in speculating about Clinton's health? she'll either be fit and serve her term(s), or her health will fail her at some point and her VP will step in, the VP that was part of her ticket and subject to the electorate's will.
Click to expand...

Eh?

A candidate's health is every inch the valid consideration. You want to know who you are most likely to be electing: the candidate or their VP. McCain's health was a perfectly valid concern, for example, because God forbid the words "President Palin" appear anywhere in this reality.



The problem isn't that they are talking about Hillary's health. The problem is that their claims are based on complete bull**** that they themselves manufactured....

...for purposes of talking about her health.



(And of course, the Trump tie-in: they aren't mentioning his own unsupported claims to being in outstanding health despite his obvious weight issue and fast food quasi-addiciton. I'd sure worry about electing someone who constantly eats fast food because it's convenient. Bill loved Mc D's and it almost killed him).
 
LowDown said:
Just off the top of my head, I'd say that they are not as concerned about Trump because he's not quite the pathological liar that Hillary is, and when he says he's in good health people tend to believe it.
Click to expand...

A curious statement that.

During the primaries Politifact had Trump at just 9% true and only 26% mostly or partly true. So Trump says true or semi-true things just 35% of the time but Hillary is the pathological liar :confused:
 
Mr Person said:
Eh?

A candidate's health is every inch the valid consideration. You want to know who you are most likely to be electing: the candidate or their VP. McCain's health was a perfectly valid concern, for example, because God forbid the words "President Palin" appear anywhere in this reality.



The problem isn't that they are talking about Hillary's health. The problem is that their claims are based on complete bull**** that they themselves manufactured....

...for purposes of talking about her health.



(And of course, the Trump tie-in: they aren't mentioning his own unsupported claims to being in outstanding health despite his obvious weight issue and fast food quasi-addiciton. I'd sure worry about electing someone who constantly eats fast food because it's convenient. Bill loved Mc D's and it almost killed him).
Click to expand...

We're in agreement here. As I explained in another post, Hillary's confirmed health issues are associated with old age and don't impede her ability to lead a cognitively/psychologically demanding life. Yes they have the potential to progress and undermine her ability to lead the country, but it'd be unfair to deny her the opportunity based on chance, especially that she'd have a ready replacement that was subject to the electorate's choice.

The only scenario where Hillary's health is pertinent to her candidacy is if she were in a condition such that she may drop dead any moment now, which isn't the case, but her political adversaries are concocting the most inane fabrications to promulgate that fantasy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom