Doctors concerned about Hillary's health

[Irate Canadian]

No, his point was to move the goalpost. He's wrong in stating that the discussions about Hillary's health is based on a partisan bias, which is why he had to deflect from that point. It also shows his bias against conservatives, which makes his claim that he's conservative, or even a moderate, laughable.

Gee, build a straw man?

Tass is right. If people really want to settle this, let a doctor actually examine the patient. Hell, if the Trump campaign is willing, get them to pay for it.

[seanD]

Gee, build a straw man?

Tass is right. If people really want to settle this, let a doctor actually examine the patient. Hell, if the Trump campaign is willing, get them to pay for it.

It's evident you don't even know what a strawman means.

[Irate Canadian]

It's evident you don't even know what a strawman means.

And it's evident that the point went over your head. Not much I can do if you wilfully misconstrue my words.

[Teallaura]

It seems to be a worthy discussion among certain media outlets. Worthy enough to silence any discussion about it

Yeah, I'm sure highly partisan outlets on both sides will fight it out. And by all means, if you really think this is actually important, keep right one discussing it.


But as a criteria and with next to nothing in the way of substance it's a waste of time compared to the numerous policy/ethical issues that actually have substance to them.

[One Bad Pig]

Gee, build a straw man?

Tass is right. If people really want to settle this, let a doctor actually examine the patient. Hell, if the Trump campaign is willing, get them to pay for it.

If any of the perceived health problems really do exist, there's not a snowball's chance in hell Hillary would let herself be examined by an independent doctor.

[Cow Poke]

Hell, if the Trump campaign is willing, get them to pay for it.

And Hillary would be just as transparent in this as she is in sharing her emails and encouraging her minions to testify instead of taking the fifth.

[seanD]

Yeah, I'm sure highly partisan outlets on both sides will fight it out. And by all means, if you really think this is actually important, keep right one discussing it.


But as a criteria and with next to nothing in the way of substance it's a waste of time compared to the numerous policy/ethical issues that actually have substance to them.

Personally, health issues in context of POTUS is of no concern to me. Won't make a difference who's POTUS and what issues they have in the big picture. And I actually thought the whole health thing was pretty dumb at first, especially when people came out with that video of her acting goofy and claiming she was having a seizure. For me, it was the over-the-top MSM dismissal of it and then the censorship of the subject that followed. That's what got me latched onto it, because now the 1st Amendment seems to be at issue.

[Teallaura]

Personally, health issues in context of POTUS is of no concern to me. Won't make a difference who's POTUS and what issues they have in the big picture. And I actually thought the whole health thing was pretty dumb at first, especially when people came out with that video of her acting goofy and claiming she was having a seizure. For me, it was the over-the-top MSM dismissal of it and then the censorship of the subject that followed. That's what got me latched onto it, because now the 1st Amendment seems to be at issue.

Fair enough. It's the issue per se that I find silly.

[KingsGambit]

The answer I seemed to be given earlier was that it mattered because Hillary would likely try to hold on to the office even if unable to serve. But wouldn't conservatives in theory be okay with a weakened executive branch, assuming they don't lose both branches of Congress?

(This is to say nothing of the fact that most conservatives' favorite modern president bordered on incapacitation for much of his modern second term).

[Cow Poke]

The answer I seemed to be given earlier was that it mattered because Hillary would likely try to hold on to the office even if unable to serve. But wouldn't conservatives in theory be okay with a weakened executive branch, assuming they don't lose both branches of Congress?

(This is to say nothing of the fact that most conservatives' favorite modern president bordered on incapacitation for much of his modern second term).

It's not just Hillary. It's her vast political machine and alliances.

[KingsGambit]

It's not just Hillary. It's her vast political machine and alliances.

So where do her health issues come into play here? I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from.

[Teallaura]

So where do her health issues come into play here? I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from.

Presumably, the vast left wing conspiracy that would take power while she lay around on a ventilator

[KingsGambit]

Presumably, the vast left wing conspiracy that would take power while she lay around on a ventilator

So what does it matter if she's in charge or those people? Either way, you're getting the same policies.

[Teallaura]

So what does it matter if she's in charge or those people? Either way, you're getting the same policies.

There I would side with them - it matters because it undermines the Constitution.

[KingsGambit]

There I would side with them - it matters because it undermines the Constitution.

They don't have any credibility with me on that count due to their refusal to even entertain a Supreme Court vacancy.